Ok guys...no fouling this one up. How about an intelligent conversation about lures and baits...

I think baits are often overused and unecessary for fox...coyotes I cannot say. I am guessing if its cold enough, lure and bit would be a good idea for yotes.

Lure makers, can one get away with just a good lure down the hole in the cold...or do we need more?

I am also partial to the idea that when its cold...the breed is on and thats a plus for lures...

GO!

I use only lure at sets, never have used any bait in addition to the lure in nearly 30 years. I've trapped with just bait, trapped with just lure and trapped with bait and lure in combination. I can't speak for all lures as I don't know thier formulation but with Lenon lures no bait is needed in addition to the lure to make it more effective. The only reason I ever used chunk baits was when trapping the hot Summer months for bounty as ants, grasshoppers and locusts would eat up a gob of lure much quicker than a cube of bait. I use lures appropriately for the type of set being made. At hole sets I use a food based lure with gland, passion and curiosity ingredients added as the idea of a hole set is to fool the animal into thinking something edible was buried there. At scent post, flat sets and blind scent sets or any set without a hole I use a urine/gland/passion/curiosity lure with no food/hunger element in the formulation. Although they always work for the most part at any type set, a food lure would not be natural smeared on a scent post for example and a urine gland would not be complete for a hole set without the food element included. With all due respect to some of the premiere lure makers, this idea that every set needs a lure and a bait is an idea hoisted off on trappers for years by by the late E. J. Dailey and O. L. Butcher. That idea was probably wise considering the types of lures they formulated for the most part which were urine gland lures with no other callings added in the formulation. My Dad developed lures for his own long bounty lines for convenience, no sloppy jugs of bait to haul around potentially contaminating his traps and equipment, just a nice neat paste lure to apply to a set with no drip or slop. Asa

Very interesting. My thinking is that with the right set, a good lure or urine can trigger them to either dig or simply try to inestigate...which can only yieled a connection.

Sheep wool or a grass wad down the hole can act as an attractor...when lure is also used. People think I'm crzy but I use one ply of unscented toilet paper jammed down the hole...they have to get that out...and its all over.

this year i only used lure till over half way thru than used some Bait that Bill Morgan gave me and did very well. i have never used lure and bait together. I always use Bills Pro Squeeze on my sets. Past years i used Cheese curls in my holes with pee and gland all season. The year i did that i caught 36 in like 2 weeks with 18 traps. So its not conclusive info but it is some info. I think The urine aand smell had alot to do with those 36 fox plus the cheesy smell in teh hole.

BTW before anyone says anything. I am not an expert just a kid who likes to trap fox.

Len, what's Bills pro-squeeze smell like?

I dont know exactly. it smells alot like pee but something is added to change it slightly. I know one part of the process but i am sworn to secrecy(sp?)

My jub of bladder peee is still near 1 gal. I take out about 1 pint every 2-3 days...and replace it with fresh bladder pee right away. Nothing like the adult fox urine right from the source...

An extra step,thats what it usually all comes down to.How a person gets a canine to make an extra step.

Sometimes I'm on the trapline and have a Shakesperian moment--hark what light through yonder window breaks!

An excellent lure is good,an excellent bait is good.If you have the right combination it can't be beat and you will get the maximum number of steps out of any canine willing to commit.

This being said,I use mainly just lure for practical reasons but know otherwise.

i only want the canine to take one step, normally thats it. i can count the number of misses from mis steps on my fingers from this year.

Lenni,you're a much luckier man than me.I hope you're doing some snow trapping and not relying on prints in the dirt.

i use all peat and every set is smooth as a babys behind when i am done. if i fox steps on that pattern i know. when i said one step i ment one step on my pattern, i want his first as his last, one step to sniff and BAM.

on a side note to Bill, John the bait he gave me was a ground up meat based bait. i had one fox actualy digging while in the trap. i slowly approched the fox and saw him digging with his un caught front foot at what was the dirt hole.

I feel anymore than 1 type of lure or bait at a set is a waist of money. I use lure only, dip a twig or weed in, throw in hole making sure the lure is as far back in the hole as I can get it and beat feet. No need for a splash of urine, a dribble of gland lure, a hunk of bait and a grass plug fouling up a dirt hole.

I have used just lure for the past 20+ years for all my canine trapping. And over the years I have tried many different makers to come up with what I now use as my go to lures. The only time I use bait is at water sets for the coon or prebaiting sets before season.Trapping is a game where you need to be constantly looking to throw a curve at them. This next season I'm looking to try out a couple of baits that I see other have good success with such as Hiawatha Valley and Powder River. Never stop learning and never stop looking. And good luck trapping.

Mike367 wrote...I feel anymore than 1 type of lure or bait at a set is a waist of money. I use lure only, dip a twig or weed in, throw in hole making sure the lure is as far back in the hole as I can get it and beat feet. No need for a splash of urine, a dribble of gland lure, a hunk of bait and a grass plug fouling up a dirt hole.

You took the words right out of my thoughts Mike!
Sometimes if a set hasn't produced in some time or after a significant rain fall I will give set backing a squirt of urine to refreshen the set. I use a good pump bottle so I can stand back and off to the side of a set a few feet so I don't have to track right up to the set. Asa

Me too,unfortunately its not a perferct world and the animals don't always cooperate.I mentioned snow because its not just the misses in the pattern that matter,sometimes it can take something extra to get them to step on the pattern.It also doesn't matter where you bed your trap you WILL have misses regardless of where you place it.I've set traps center-tight,offsetright-right back a little center,back a little offset,etc etc,etc.In all of these scenarios I had misses.Its something that experience teaches and sometimes experience is self evident.

Anyone that doubts the effectiveness of a good bait in certain situations needs to experiment a little more.If you've got canines that are being standoffish or passing by sets get yourself a roadkilled feral cat,chunk it up,taint it for a couple days,then stuff that down your hole.It can be odd how areas that were "trapped out" suddenly come to life.

Then theres the location aspect to the whole canine trapping thing.I've worked on telephone poles from Se Pa down into Maryland.I recall driving back to the motel one evening and I saw a man walking out his long driveway with a pair of foxes hunting in the fields on both sides of him.I also saw numerous other fox darting about.This leads me to believe the area is literally crawling with fox and 100-600 fox from that area doesn't make much of an impression on me.The same goes for coyote or what have you,in some locations its easy to rack up numbers of any given animal.

We have found that lures are all you really need to trap fox and urine is helpful ,BUT have found that coyotes didnt work the sets as much untill we started to use bait ,so with that said we started to use it on some sets with bait in the hole and fox gland lure around the lip or in the hole and found that it started to catch both fox and coyote consistantly.Their is no wrong or right way ,it is what works .

cndgmn wrote...Anyone that doubts the effectiveness of a good bait in certain situations needs to experiment a little more

With all due respect, I trapped with and without bait and used chunk bait for 25 years during the bounty trapping era and I could never see one increase or decrease in set acceptance or avoidance whether or not the bait was used in addition to one of my lures. Asa

ASA ,what are your thoughts with what i mentioned above ?

Ace,I'm sorry but I've got to respectfully disagree with you on this one.I have no doubt you've learned from experience as have I.To be fair you've probably tried several more lures(experimental or otherwise)than me.At this point in the game I'm sticking with my beliefs until proven otherwise.I have never used your lures and may have to put in an order for next year.You know,leave no stone unturned.

As for bait vs lure, ive yet to find a lure, that, when sets are frozen down, the hole place is dug out like a bomb hit it.

In my experiance, i like to use lures in sets where i control there foot movements (like a walk through) and use bait in open no blocking at all dirtholes.

The commercial baits made now, have the same if not more ingrediants in them than lures do. Its in my opinion, the bait allures to the coyote as an actuall parcel to eat, not just a odd smell in a hole on a stick (not that they know what a stick is)

if im using a t-bone, it gets a lure. if its a dirthole, it gets bait.

i wouldnt dare go out and set up for coyotes without bobcat meat based bait.

Well said Charles...you surprise me sometimes.Thats what I'm saying.There is no convincing me a canine can't tell the turkey from the drippings.

Ive dabbled with lures in a hole, and yes, caught coyotes that way.

however, ive seen far to many times, when theres just one track in the pattern, a one step and sniff and move on, IF the set isnt constructed as a walkthrough.

foot guiding is not my style, so, on dirtholes, using bait, i feel i get the necesasary foot movement from the bait as they are digging and scratching, to go ahead and make the catch.

i am curious to know if having an abundance of natural easy food in an area would make bait less or more effective? i also am curious if the number of yotes in an area can be a factor when using a lure?

let us hear it buzzard!

stackem up (coons with bait) and remake....around here coons are worth more then yotes

I do tend to agree with Charles, especially when our weather consistently gets below freezing - a chunk or spoon of bait in a hole tends to get the coyotes to stay longer - foxes, no idea - we dont have enough

coon are worth money to.

aint there aint a LURE out there that will NOT catch a coon anyway.

We do like buzz

NYfox asked...ASA ,what are your thoughts with what i mentioned above ?

If you go back up near the top of this thread you'll note that I stated that I can't speak for all lure brands as I don't know what is in thier formulations.
I note that the lure you used was a gland lure at a dirthole set. A dirthole set would not be a complete lure with just gland lure and no food/hunger element on down in the hole. A good call lure like Super All Call or Super Range All Call should already have a food/hunger element in the formulation so when a gob on a stick is at the bottom of the hole the animal will not only be curuious but think something to eat has been buried there by some other animal species and dig for it. Gland lures in my opinion are better served at scent post sets, flat sets, blind scent sets or any set where there is no hole to represent something edible buried there. So, I can only conclude that those who have better results using bait than lure aren't using an appropriately formulated lure for usage at hole sets. For example, I would never use one of my Nature's Call urine/gland/passion/curiosity formulated lures at a dirt hole set withou adding a food bait down the hole. With the Super All call and Super Range All Call lures that food element is already added to the formulation. Don't get me wrong, I've caught scores of fox, coyote and bobcat using just Nature's Call at a hole set for experimentation but as has been stated by others it didn't always offer a reason for the canine to tear into the hole to get the food out of the bottom. As I said, Nature's Call is something I use a lot of but reserve it for sets where there is no hole. Asa
PS- I think this could be a regional thing too, depending upon the animal population vs the available food supply. Around my area, Upper Michigan, the winters are many times severe but coyotes, fox and bobcats reside in the cedar swamps along with an abundant food supply of rabbits, ruffed grouse, starving weak deer and deer that died of starvation. For the most part they could care less about a chunk of bait at a set unless it offered some other attraction, curiosity, passion, territorial, gland, etc. I have the best results in my region using Nature's Call lures at post sets during the deep snow winter months, its the time of year when Nature's Call's passion ingredients shine and animals are thinking territories more so than eating when thier stomachs are always full and they always respond.

Man I like these posts; wealth of info!!

Buzzy, have you kept records on which set takes more animals?

Buzzard wrote...all locations have two sets bout 10 to 20 feet apart.......all of them, no matter what.
Lefthand set gets beaver meat bait soaked in Dobbins bait solution only........no urine or lure
Ritehand set gets a gland lure and urine.......no bait
All the bases are covered that way and there are NO what ifs

Well Buzz, are you going to leave us hanging on which sets generally produce the best results when compared side by side like that????? C'mon now Buzz! Asa

I rarely use bait and I think that helps cut down on possums and skunks.

I have not seen that using a gland lure or any other lure has cut down on the catch of possum or skunk.If they are there you will catch them imo.

Hence the reason to get out there and experiment and find out what works in your area

Asa, just wondering....do you know how to use the "quote" feature to answer someone's specific question. I have noticed that you do alot of extra re-typing rather than using this tool. Just trying to help you out as you do me.

You never know, NYfox. How do you know you wouldn't have caught twice as many non-targets if you'd been using bait?

As ASA wrote, it might be a regional thing, and a time of year thing.
Way too many variables to make a hard fast statement about lures, baits, and coyotes, or even fox or bobcats.

Over the many miles, and years, I have learned you never say never or always, as those two words just do not apply to trapping over any period of time or miles.

So what do I do and use? Sometimes everything, and now and again, nothing, just make a set in trails. Experiment in your area with your lures and baits, and see what works for YOU, then remember it may not be right for someone else making sets different on different kinds of location or under different weather or other extreme conditions.

One thing about trapping---the door is always open to learn something new, different, and more!

How do i know ?We have used both and the numbers of non targets have not changed ,skunks and possum are curious and will investigate a gland ,call,ect lure if they smell it as much as a bait and you will catch them ,ask any fox trapper who uses lure and i guarentee they catch loads of possum and skunks .They are scavengers looking for any kind of food and even a smell of fox anals will bring them in

I AM a fox trapper. I'm not saying that possums and skunks won't get caught on lure but I really do believe that my count is lower on them when I don't use bait..or maybe there are just less around these days?

Nice picture, Buzzard. I happen to like eating crow.lol

Number17 asked...
Asa, just wondering....do you know how to use the "quote" feature to answer someone's specific question. I have noticed that you do alot of extra re-typing rather than using this tool. Just trying to help you out as you do me.

I don't re-type anything, just use the right click copy and paste method but no, I don't know how to use the quote feature. Thanks for asking, I'm interested! Asa

Buzzard:
Thanks for the reply and you bring up a GOOD point. Once one adds Dobbin's solution to some meat cubes or makes a batch of the Nelson formula baits for examples that are so widly used then it is no longer a BAIT but is now a LURE. A true bait would be simply a chunk of meat, fish or fruit with no other ingredients added. I should have differentiated that in my earlier postings. In effect, my whole line of Super All Call and Super Range All Call lures are actually combination bait/lures, that is why no additional bait makes them any more effective. Asa

Slim,You've got a real way with words.You also write some of the wisest statements I've ever read.Can I call you Ol'Signature A Minute??

Buzz,nice double.Its interesting to know what a half crazy person does,the results are quite interesting.I may have to try my own experiments a little further next year,its winding down quickly this year.

Ace,as always you give plenty of food for thought.

TTT

If the spoonful of bait or chunk of beaver meat is hidden in a dirthole how does the critter know what he is getting until he actually digs it out? And by that time if the trap hasnt fired its not gonna. Most canines are caught out of curiosity, very few are hungry. I have tried house cat meat and dont care for the fuss and mess. My favorite go to fox lures are Fox Hollow's Voo Doo and Blackie's Blend TKO. Bait solutions are nothing more than lures. Not saying other methods dont work, just what works for me. Mike

Actually, I think the K-9's nose is keen enough that it can tell what smell is coming from that hole before he ever gets it in his mouth.
I mean...If you got your beaver chunk meat in an empty CLEAN peanut butter jar. That K=9 KNOWS that in this hole is Beaver meat, Peanut butter, That the Peanut butter is JIFFY and that it was Jiffy Crunchy not Creamy!
JMO

University experiments concluded that if there is many ingredients in a lure than a canine and many other animals are capable of standing back and separating and analyzing each individual odor without even having to come close. No wonder that perhaps the number one cause of set avoidance, walk-bys, failure to work the set, etc may be overusage of attractors. Asa

so actually, fox pee isn't a cover scent?? If the study is right, the K9s smell the pee and the human scent?

Also something I have noticed this year, Some give advice on using a skunk type lure up high and down wind from the set with a bait/lure in the hole. Most of the time I use this is with a dirt hole set, and on every miss I have had, the fox after a short visit would go to the other lure, marking the area most of the time. If I use the lure in the hole, it's a fox still at the hole waiting for me.

Good point KYCountry, I don't personally believe in or use attractors, including urine, any place except right at the set placed where the animal has to pass over the trap to get at them. Asa

Man, this thread has done pretty well...

I just use lure at my fox sets...two, one at each set...6-8 feet apart. I will use bait to HOLD THEM there if/when it gets real cold. My bait of choice?

JW Crawford's bacon grease from the fry pan

If using dirtholes, I think it will only take ONE step and even bladder peee can trigger that. One step on the pattern...and why?

So, the fox can stick his head in the hole...like they LOVE to do.

Imagine if the baldder pee you used had enough glycerine in it to keep the hole from freezing? That hole would then act like a chimney...carryng the odors out.

Ever see a cartoon with the mad scientist perculating some concoction and the steam/odor/vapors are coming out and floating on the floor?

Thats what a dirt hole does...

Good posts guys..and thanks to Mr. Buzzard for not defiling this thread. I owe you a beer...LOL...

Asa, I also occasionally place Skunk essence "up and behind" my sets. I believe it helps get a "passer by's" attention in cold or windy weather. The reason I don't use it at the hole is, I have noticed, In my area..That I get more Grinners if the skunk is in the hole. Does that make any sense?

I should probably re-word my last post. What I meant was the canine cant tell the difference between what is lure and what is bait. My opinion is the best attractor for canines is a gland based, food/curiosity type lure. And to answer Buzzies insult, Im no Brownie but can hold my own. Mike

Yes bic, that makes sense and using plain skunk musk as the call probably doesn't distract from the set like a multi-ingredient call lure may do.

Mike wrote...My opinion is the best attractor for canines is a gland based, food/curiosity type lure.

I agree Mike, its all it takes to do the job. Asa

How do you know they stick their whole head in the hole?,did you sit at a set and watch them?,oh ya,thats right,you saw it on a vidio I posted.

No Phil..I knew a guy who had 2 fox in an enclosure. They were his pets. He did extensive testing on lures and dirtholes with them...traps and all. At least 50% of the time they stuck their whole head in the hole when investigating. There's other things they did that i cant say...

Every magician has his secrets...

Buzzy, i think I like you....Rings of Saturn is one of my screen names...

Phil, your thoughts on baits, lures and urines?

Seriously..Hey Phil, I'm sure you have something to offer to this thread. I know you wouldn't give up too much info, but how about a morsel or two?

here is where i differ greatly from you guys. I have a few lures that i got ( John they are from bill, only me and him have these two) And i wont use these lure above 40 degrees. once it gets around freezin i break these lures out. However i do put a diffrent smell in each hole an dmy double sets are normally no more than 10 feet away

If you trap long enough I think that you will find what works for you. It can be very different than what someone else has used for success.

I trapped in the northern states for many years and used bait or lure down a hole and a dab of skunk nearby as a call. Any critter with a nose may smell the skunk and then find it's way to the hole. Using skunk essence in the hole didn't mean I was going to catch more nontarget animals. Your going to get them! The reason behind my reasoning was that the skunk essence out of the hole seemed to carry in the air currents farther than when it was down the hole. When I made lures and baits back then I never put skunk essence in the formula.

I now make many of my lures with skunk essence in them because most trappers don't want to carry a bottle of skunk with them. I do still carry a bottle of skunk essence with me even if I have lures with skunk in them. I trap for fun now and don't trap hard like I used to, as I don't have time anymore.

I will make sets that are out of the way and not where placement of sets should be. When doing this type of trapping you better have a good call agent that might bring them off the beaten path and that's also why I carry a bottle of skunk essence with me.
When I really want to be sure I'm gonna have the best chance to catch somthing I'll trap location. Animals are like people, some like stuff that smells alot and the next animal that smells the same scent might back off and avoid the set.

There are times when lures and baits work better in one area than in another area. I can only try to get you to test different ways of using scents and lures and find out what works best for you. At the same time never quit testing to see if something else might work better for you. After awhile you'll have a pretty good idea of what works for you when you really want to hammer the fur. I always put a few sets out for testing and put other sets out that I knew had the best chance to catch my target animal.

Heck, I forgot what the question was now! LOL

How big yall makin your holes? mine are only the diam. of a quarter or half dollar

You must have bee watching to many Tom Miranda videos! LOL
Dirt holes can be any size, but I like mine big enough to look like a critter bigger than a mouse lives in it. I'd say that as many traps as phil runs he doesn't have time to make big holes. That fox is gonna put his nose in the hole no matter how big it is. A smaller hole just means more diggin for the fox! LOL

i have never seen a Mirranda movie. Thats just how i make my sets. i used to dig holes when i ran 12 traps in 4 hours but this season i ran an ave of 25 in 2-3 hours so it was Pop&Go i dont really see how the huge hole will affect the outcome that much/ seems like a waste of a minute or 2 multiplied 30 times your lookin at an hour saved

good replys lots of info

I have used both big and little holes and both work well. I used to dig big holes in the summer time so I'd be ready to trap in the fall. I didn't even know you could use little holes. LMAO

I stiil make some bigger holes just to pass the time I guess. Most of the time I do it in a bank or something as the bigger hole can bee seen better than a small hole. Kinda like putting something white in a cage trap or hanging something like a wing over a set, EYE CANDY!

When I trapped hard I didn't use many big holes most were small. But then I didn't use many holes when I trapped hard. Most of the time I used post and blind sets as they were pretty fast also.

One thing that I havent noticed being mentioned in this thread is animal pop. density. The size of the population in the area also has some influence on what combinations if any work consistantly. In lower populations food availability is normally higher. In those cases I have found curiosity type ayttractors to be more effective. In high pop. areas food type baits work better. Climate also will dictate to some degree what is effective. here in the north I do better with a bait/lure combo. When I trapped the south however i did much better with just lure and no bait. There is an infinate number of variables that will dictate what works better and when with canines. Just my two cents and thats probanbly all its worth.

Your Right Dave, I just ran out of running my big mouth, and pooped out on typing anything more. I trapped in the north and played in the snow and cold for near 30 years. Good populations of all types of critters. Now been trapping in the south and it's very different. Not as many critters in the area I trap and the RAIN RAIN RAIN is much different than what I was used to up there. Never used peat moss up north, once it got cold it stayed that way most of the time and I'd just grind up that hard dirt and use some salt at times. Now I've had to learn to play with red clay cement! And I use alot of peat now. LOL

Thanks for your input Dave, that is very important info you just gave.

Asa, So if by adding a bait solution to your meat creates a lure instead of a bait. (wow that was a mouth full!) Then how many people out there are using a true bait? If this is the case I would completely agree that both are not needed. If using the "bait" which actually has lure traits or additives, then all of your bases are covered with one product be that whatever flavor it is. Now if you are talking about using a lure only, then you can taylor it to whatever your desired outcome may be. You can with a lure play an animals instincts without using hunger as a compelling aspect of attraction. However with a food based Lure ie. "Bait" you will always be appealing to the target animals stomach because of its food based nature? So why would one not always use "bait" and get the best of both? Maybe I overcomplicated this whole discussion. Just curious. As for me, I have caught all of my animals save one this season on Kippersnacks down the hole and a shot of Red Fox urine on the backing. The one exception I caught on a blind set where I had previously caught another and didn't have time to remake the entire set. So I through out a trap and let the odors generated from the first act as the attractant. Wow it was rank. Thanks.

Here is a tidbit of a "STUDY" I done.Pulled up to a spot JWC,and I was trapping,and there was JWC at my set pointing at a big dirt clod in the jaws of my trap stating he did not do it.Well ,I remade the set,and gave it a good shot of "bladderpee",all the while JWC was doing a "STUDY" of me.

Well,you guessed it,next morning a fox in my set..
Next day JWC was at Rodgers Hides singing the praises of bladder pee.I think that study made it into his latest tape..

Phil Brown.....sighning out.....traps to study.....then furauction.....Reading PA.....

I make my own bait with my own soulution mixed in it and it works really great. With the soulution you have alot of different smells comming out of the bait. Most of the time the bait is all I use but sometimes will add a castor based lure also.

Phil,I hope you charged for lessons.You're gonna have to get a trademark to keep from getting ripped off.

I didn't want to say anything but I saw some wierd stuff when I was out your way on business a few weeks back.In the back of a field I saw a blue minivan,as I recall it had a bumper sticker that said Amish Rule!! Anyhow,it looked like some guy was staking out a goat on a lead and setting up trail cameras.I won't go into what all happened with the goat,this being a family site and all.I just found it repulsive and very,very odd.My best guess is that they were some dimwit trying to film a chucabra.I guess goats attract them better if they're all sweaty and worn out.....hmmm,go figure.

Think of this way. Let us say that a lure formula calls for 4 ozs of castor, 6 ozs of muskrat musk, 6 ozs of coyote glands, 1 oz asafoedita, 1 oz tonquin, 1 oz civet musk and 8 ozs coyote urine. One uses this at a hole set along with a 1" cube of bobcat meat down the hole. Why would it be any different if one included the bobcat meat, say 8 ozs of ground meat into the lure formula to begin with and ended up with a nice neat thick pasty lure to carry around in small bottles. Why would one want to apply lure and also carry with them big jugs of juicy stinky bait chunks dripping and slopping down the side of the jar contaminating one's traps, sets and equipment. That is why my Dad originally developed lures that were complete in themselves with a food/hunger element added along with territorial ingredients so there would be no need of extra bottles of urine to carry either, just one small bottle of lure to quickly, conveniently and cleanly apply to a set. My Dad named these lures "ALL CALL" because they were formulated to appeal to ALL KNOWN CALLS of the animal they were formulated for; hunger, curiosity, passion, nature, territorial, etc. Asa
PS- The above formula off the top of my mind would be a good one I'm sure BUT it is not the formula for any Lenon lure.

Thanks Asa. I agree with you completely. One bottle. I have even had problems with urines in a small spray bottle contaminating the outside and therefore your hands/gloves. Your dad was onto something with the thickness also. Keep it clean and simple. I like the thought of all in one.

Why do all good post on here turn into Phil vs Nightwish ? They are both good trappers with tons of time and tons of fox to trap. Bottom line on the lure and bait issue is whatever makes ya feel good. Mr. Lenon's advice should be followed as his father was a Master. Sure a fox can smell a skunk a mile away but when he smells a BLEND of gland/food/curiosity his nose needs to touch the source of the odor to properly decode it. So when making trench sets with a standard trowel the hole is large enough for the fox to poke his nose in, he will have to step down to get in it. When using small dirt holes the fox needs first dig out the hole in order to get his nose on it. Thats why using the trench set with one lure as far back in the hole as possible is so deadly. In areas were Phil and Nightwish trap there are so many foxes that the curiosity aspects of a lure is lost and its all about getting the food first so in those areas you could probably catch foxes on pop tarts. Mike

Poptarts huh? Hmmmm I think you're onto something there. I can feed myself and the foxes at the same time. LMAO

Good post Mike! I never make dirtholes more than 3" or so in diameter and at least 10" deep so a fox or coyote will have to make at least a few digs to get the scent stick up and out of the hole. Asa

God posts here guys...I have to skin so i'll be back on this one.

As for Phil and his idea that i "studied" his sets...of course, I did...I study all trappers sets and techniques. I knew about bladder pee LONG ago...and used it long ago...only now I use it more. Not from copying Phil...but from learing from others.

Thanks guys for this good info...good posts!!

Very informative posts all!
this needs to be in the archives when it's run it's course.
keep it up!
thank you all.
bob

hey i had a gray fox come under my tree stand and put his nose in a pop tart wrapper, last year, i normally carry pop tarts while deer hunting for snacks

hey i had a gray fox come under my tree stand and put his nose in a pop tart wrapper, last year i normally carry pop tarts while deer hunting for snacks

What flavor?
need to carry a few?
bob

either strawberry or smores not sure but thats what i buy, the tree stand is like a shed about 14 ft up and i kept hearing something and couldnt see it finally i looked out window and down and there he was, it was barely day light he stuck his snout in sniffed around and went on wrapper had blown out of stand a few days earlier so i guess my scent was gone

Good post indeed!

I personally do not like the trap stake wiggled out hole idea...or anything close to it. if that is the way a guy wnats to make them..and catchs fur on it, then kudos to him. The only way I ever had success with that is if its reamed out to a 1-2 in hole..and then you might as well just use your trowle anyway.

Why is a bigger dirthole better?

Canines LOVE to stick their nose in stuff...and wild canines have long since have been known to stick their entire snout in a dirthole. A tiny 1/2" to 1" hole doesnt allow for that. A 2-4" hole does.

I dont think depth is a big deal on foxes...esp if the trap is set up right. One step is all it takes...

BUT...IMO, only 5-60% of the fox are caught investigating the dirthole..the rest are caught pawing at the pattern. This has been noted in several fox studies that I have in my posession.

With these two factors, we can see why the dirthole is the standard...and the best way to catch most wild k9s..and has been for decades...

The mouse hole,I like to use 3 in a open pattern,makes a canine move it's feet to sniff all three holes.
Just my thoughts,I'm not big on land trapping so take it as just my take?
bob

For fox I agree that the dirthole is usaully the most productive, but for coyotes it seems that a mouse hole or flat set is more productive espeacially in areas where the coyotes have been around the block a time or two and have seen their share of dirt holes. Coyotes also seem to remember not only what they see much longer than a fox but also what they smell. That is one of the reasons I like to change up odors after a few days with coyotes. never really found it neccesary for fox (red). I know nothing regarding greys.

I honestly can't decide wether a bigger or smaller dirthole is better. It usually just depends on the soil type. Soft soil gets a nice trowel dug hole and rocky hard soil usually gets a rebar reaming.

I wax my rebar stakes but it doesn't take long before that wax chips and a little rust develops on the stake. I wonder how much scent gets left behind in a reamed out dh.

Very good thread, Nightwish..I wouldn't waste my time arguing with a guy who may know how to trap but doesn't know how to be friendly.

One thing for sure is that a 3" or 4" dirthole offers better set visibility and eye appeal. The wind may have shifted and is blowing the lure's odor in the opposite direction than anticipated but one still has a good cahnce at making a catch through set visibility and eye appeal. I believe that I could trap up to a 50% harvest rate using flashy visible dirtholes if I didn't use any lure or odor attractor whatsoever.

Nightwish wrote... I dont think depth is a big deal on foxes...esp if the trap is set up right. One step is all it takes...

I probably catch a good 90% of fox, coyote and bobcat with thier first step into the dirt pattern. However, with that other 10% I do think a deep enough hole is important as those agile pawed little red fox can walk up along side of a set and stick thier skinny leg down into a dirthole and have that scent stick up and out of there with hardly any disturbance to the hole. I've seen it scores of times. Sometimes they just drop the scent stick and other times they run with it. Asa

One thing for sure is that a 3" or 4" dirthole offers better set visibility and eye appeal. The wind may have shifted and is blowing the lure's odor in the opposite direction than anticipated but one still has a good cahnce at making a catch through set visibility and eye appeal. I believe that I could trap up to a 50% harvest rate using flashy visible dirtholes if I didn't use any lure or odor attractor whatsoever.

I agre with Asa..and have often been tempted to NOT use any lure...just dog dirtholes and keep resetting. Just as an experiment. But, alas, I can't bring myself to do it...

Nightwish wrote...I agre with Asa..and have often been tempted to NOT use any lure...just dog dirtholes and keep resetting. Just as an experiment. But, alas, I can't bring myself to do it...

One could never harvest the same numbers without adding lure to the set. I have done limited experiments with dirtholes and no lure and that is where I got this 50% harvest rate idea. It is my opinion that those who do not utilize good set visibility and eye appeal along with a good lure are not harvesting at a maximum potential. Again in my opinion, those few extra wary coyotes one catches by using small mouse holes and blending in every set will never compensate for the number they missed by not utilizing good set visibility and eye appeal. Every dirthole set I make is flashy, a 3" or 4" hole made into a backing and constructed in sand, short grass, reindeer moss, pine needles, etc so nothing is obstructing the view of the set for a considerable distance. I like lots of sand for eye appeal and fresh dirt also has an odor and calling of its own, canine will investigate fresh digging. I believe this is one of the secrets to more successful trapping of any animal species. Generally speaking, I make sets in groupings and at least one set in a grouping of hole sets is a post set, flat set or a blind scent set using a completely different more subtle lure that is specifically formulated for such sets. This will take the occasional wary or educated coyote/fox that might be wise from previous experiences to flashy dirtholes and loud scents. Asa

People often think its dumb, but I leave a lot of eye appeal as well. My sets are easy to find...just look for the little dirt piles behind the sets. When i dig out the beds/holes I simple pile it behind the set, creating a backing. Its not a mile high but its enough that it cathces their eye and MINE too. When I check traps I need a reference from afar. Checking from a distance, i can see those dirtpiles.

If I think I'm off on location as well..I may dig a 3rd hole/pile and create a pile for eye appeal. This only if its not 20* and the ground is concrete...

I remember being 14 and getting my first trapping books in the mail. The one book said we should carry any extra dirt away from the set. I still can't believe I did that for quite a few years.
Nowadays I tend to incorporate that extra dirt into my sets.

Thank-you for letting me know that I'm not doing things wrong.lol

No problem Beach...it may not be cool for Yotes..but for our dumb foxes, its no biggie...

Just look at my pics...you'll see the dirt piles right there...

small dirtholes....small dirtholes for fox, bigger dirtholes for coyote

I'll have to go with Ace on this one.While I believe you can catch many on the initial approach you'll never catch them all.Anyone that thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves or possibly needs to learn to read sign a little better.



I don't know why you'd need a study in your possesion to figure this one out,but ok.I generally figure this out by the catch on the paw and the approach to the set(when visible).It also kinda goes against the one step theory,or is that now a one scratch theory??What I've found is that reds generally won't do much pawing if everthing is right unless they've had a previous bad experience.It is the greys and yotes that like to paw at things around here,especially the greys.

keep it up guy's the more you write the smarter I get.
Ain't nothin like learnin from the masters!
Thank you
bob

Nightwish,what kind of studies do you have ?the info from 1 video that phil b posted ?

I made a statement eariler in the post with a error...

Its 50 to 60% of all fox are caught by actually working the sets..as it should...by working the HOLE. The rest are caught by scratching at the pattern...

Fur trapper, i have a folder filled with severals tudies done by the US Govt and universities...esp the Iowa fox studies doen in the last 60s...amazing stuff.

Phils "study" story isnt quite how it happened...

...and has no variance on this thread.

My study is exactly accurate.

Phil, despite our past issues, I have the utmost respect for your trapping ability and drive..ambition. It is an ambition that few of us have..and you still push even at an age when many cannot or will not. I will always call you the Iron Man of fox trapping...

But why is it you so often refuse to talk or comment on deep and intelligent topics like this one? I mean, heck...no one is asking for secrets...just simple comments from someone who does well in fox trapping....whats your take on lures baits and urine?

As my fur buyer once told me. Sometimes you need to know when to play dumb. Very wise advice!

Phil and John, I'm not writing this out of disrespect,but you guys live in "the fox belt" of Pa. Where even a part time, half-arsed trapper like me could do a triple digit catch in a months time. Try coming north a few miles and see if you can pull your numbers. It won't happen. No matter what lure,bait,pee,small hole,big hole,no hole combo used.

You are right...

...and we dont even have as many as we used to...

Asa, How many sets do you put in an area, and how big of an area are we talking about?

Originally Posted By: Nightwish
Phil, despite our past issues, I have the utmost respect for your trapping ability and drive..ambition. It is an ambition that few of us have..and you still push even at an age when many cannot or will not. I will always call you the Iron Man of fox trapping...

But why is it you so often refuse to talk or comment on deep and intelligent topics like this one? I mean, heck...no one is asking for secrets...just simple comments from someone who does well in fox trapping....whats your take on lures baits and urine?


I will state publicly why.
First,I have helped literaly hundreds,mabe even thousands to catch fox,and other animals,over many years.Likely ,I have caught more fox than anybody in thiis area for 25 years,except 2 years.I earned it the hard way,in things you have absolutly zero knowledge about.I won't sell my soul for a couple of bucks,and I wont give certian knowledge away because I don't owe it to anybody.Nobody.No one.Im not here to appear like im mr knowledge,or a know it all.Im not here to be popular.Im here to interact,and be friends with those I like,and enjoy being around.In the days you were a toddler,and before,I was trapping with little knowledge,verble,written,and otherwise,because it wasn't avalibe,as it should be.I became what I am because I learned it the hard way,the best way.Teaching the basics is just fine,and I have done it often,so often cause its the right thig to do.But beyound that,everyone is on their own.Kids,and others these days want everything handed to them,and if it is,they become worthless,and what they have obtained become meaningless.

I can say that at no time have I ever said im the best,im the greatest,or any such thing ever.I only ever stated the facts that happened that you called me a liar,a thief,a furbuyer,or I spiked my catch with previous years fox---all of which was not true.You did this for at least 4 years for the whole world to see,and hear,,,,,,simply because you could not comprehend the possibility that it could be done.You caught 300 fox in nearly 60 days trapping full time,good for you,wooopie,I can name several that caught 150 in half the time,working a full time job.And thats all fine and good,all of it,but you come on here with your referances to "studys" of this,and that,its all horse crap.Don't need them studys to catch fox.It took me ten years to catch my first fox,at least but it got done,and I took it from there.Imagine that.You talk of the greatness of peatmoss,you did not start using peat till mid last year,after another drilled it into your thick head.Now your an expert on the subject.That OK,just makes me sick thats all.All this intelligent talk garbage to me is bolony,im not real intellengent,I just like to talk to other trappers about anything at all,don't have no need to talk intelligent about trapping.
Running out of braincells,and im hungry,have a lot of other things to say but its not worth it.

Well said Phil. With the numbers you have put up you dont need to prove anything to anyone!!

Kids,and others these days want everything handed to them,and if it is,they become worthless,and what they have obtained become meaningless.

I agree with Phil on this one...

..and its your choice if you want to talk about stuff or not...

KY Country asked...Asa, How many sets do you put in an area, and how big of an area are we talking about?

Depending upon the amount of sign in the area, I generally make two or three dirthole sets all lured with the same lure (a lure with a food/hunger element) which is appropriate for hole sets and one scent post or blind scent set lured with a completely different odor (a urine/gland/passion lure) which is appropriate for sets without holes all within a 100' radius. Asa

Very well spoken, PSB. I don't know anything about you but have had some thoughts about you simply being some mean old man. Didn't know about the stuff that I just read in your post. I'm sorry I thought bad about you..You're right, self taught is one of the most meaningful ways to learn anything.

Good grief youngone,im just short of 50,and am not mean,mostly.

Asa,

With a normal temp of 32* how far do you think you can draw a fox or coyote with a normal dose of a good lure? Lets say with normal eye appeal and location..

How about at 0*?

Would it matter if it's fox or coyote?

Amen Phil.But I've got to disagree,not intelligent my ###.You may not be booksmart or an english major but you're darn sure smart enough.Its woodsmarts that catch fox anyhow not fancy writing or being wordy.I agree with everthing else you said.

Phils not old! I meet him at the Maryland convention when fishguts was there. One look at phil and you can tell he is a [Please excuse my language... I'm an idiot] of a worker! He is a sculpted man that didn't get that way about thinking about doing something "HE did it" Phil I love your pics and vids.

What really catches foxes is long traplines and lots of fox and hard work. There is no big secret and believe it or not its not brain surgery. Some trappers have just as much drive and time as Brown puts into his trapping, but can only muster 200 fox instead of 1200. Why is that you ask? Because Mr. Brown has MOOOOOOOOOOOOOORE fox to trap. Period end of story, its not his bladder pee or trail cams, its large populations. So if nightwish and phil could kiss and make up we can have some intelligent conversation.

Good post Mike..and I agree...

There's a fine gentleman just east of here who takes 150 to 200 fox a year on 8-12 farms...just screwing around on his way to work. I dont have those numbers. we always have to look at apples to apples.

I dont kiss guys..so sorry, no kissing and making up. But the war is over...both bulls are in their own pasture and the graze is aplenty. So is the amount of good info on this thread...

Nobody else in mr Brown's neighborhood is posting numbers like his, why do you suppose that is I am guessing it is because of mr browns work ethic, experience and smarts.
If you reread mr browns post I think you will see why things are the way they are.
Me personally I bought a couple of mr crawfords videos before I had heard of him, big mistake still mad about it.

I have a question for Asa...

You mentioned in a post a few years ago, about a study of coyotes where they used one drop of urine in a gal of water inside a room with fresh carpet. They turned loose some coyote pups to see hwo they'd react to the different bottles of water with urine in it.

Can you tell us about that again? Do you remember that one?

Nightwish asked...
Asa,

With a normal temp of 32* how far do you think you can draw a fox or coyote with a normal dose of a good lure? Lets say with normal eye appeal and location..

I practice the theory that if one can't learn to place sets within 50 feet of where animals pass they will not rack up significant numbers. That being said, I have seen by tracks in the sand and snow of both fox and coyote make abrupt turns directly into a set from about 100 yards or so.

How about at 0*?

I've seen tracks in the snow making abrupt turns from 100 feet or so even by bobcats in that temperature. University studies concluded that cats can smell at least 25 times better than humans and canines can smell at least 400 times better than humans. Using that math along with seeing solid evidence of bobcats detecting lure at 100 feet in sub zero temperatures a canine should be able to come in from 800 feet. Whether it actually works that way is pure speculation because I believe it would be a rare instance when a canine would turn from its days agenda to come 800 feet over to investigate any odor.

Would it matter if it's fox or coyote?

No, I think they both smell equally well.
Asa

This has been a good thread so far and I don't want to start any problems.

Phil, Asa, Bob J., Paul, Myself, and a host of others who have spent a lifetime of hard work, take time to answer alot of questions on this forum. They should not have to give answers if they feel that it is something that they don't want to share.
I share things that took me many years of 300+ days afield to learn. Countless other time and money used to learn about the habits of mature Whitetail Bucks. I have shared what I know about trapping and the ways in which I have made my catches.
However I will not share complete formulas for lures and baits and such. I also have a few secrets I keep to myself. It's called self preservation.

If I need to eat what I trap and hunt to survive do you think I'm gonna tell you all that I know? Sure Phil lives in and area that can support the amount of catches he makes. I lust to be able to have that in my area too. Yes some people could make some pretty good catches. But I've had people trap the same area's a few yards from me and I still caught more than them. I had to trap for a living for 2 years so I could put food on the table for my family. I'd go to bed many nights with tears in my eyes wondering how I was gonna feed my kids and myself feeling worthless. Do you think I'm gonna tell you everything I have learned?

It may seem to be a question that is what you consider simple. But if anyone doesn't want to share what they have learned then they are not bad people because of it. Here's how I would deal with Phil if I was in real need.

Hey Phil I need your help, I don't have any food on the table for my kids, can you watch me make a few sets and see if I can do something better? I have three traps do you think you could use one of mine and put it out on your line if you have time? Maybe I'm doing something wrong that you can't see me doing.

People might find that what they think is a simple answer to them might not be to someone else. Hey paul I need that Backbreaker formula so I can have some more lures to sell, sounds simple to me!

I think much has been said already on this post and that people just recieved alot of information. Use what you HAVE seen on here and USE that info. Be Glad you have a forum to go to for answers. I had to learn to hunt and trap the hard way. With no info and no one to show me how.

I give as much help to people that I can. I have givin away a few secrets to very few. I love to help people as much as I can but I won't tell everything I know except to my kids.

Without getting into lengthy detail, in effect a part of the test on canines smelling ability was to take one drop of coyote urine diluted with one gallon of pure water. Then they placed one drop of that diluted mixture on to a carpet and would let in a coyote pup. Every single pup was able to instantly find that one drop spot and urinate on it. The conclusion was that canines can smell a minimum of 400 times better than humans but perhaps they can smell millions of times better than we can. Asa

That's unreal! Glad they can't tell when I'm asleep, they might eat me! LOL

Thanks Asa...amazing stuff there. That was an eye opening post for me...no doubt.

High Noon, I agree..and wasnt trying to entice...just asking, thats all. We all give and take...and this is a great resource for trappers of all ages...

I wasn't trying to pick on YOU so to speak. Put it out there as a general reason some don't give out info. Were at four pages and many folks will read this post.

Agreed!