I'm thinking about trying a toothed beaver trap. Do you think it provides much advantage? I can't even figure out where to buy such a trap though. Or do people buy the teeth part separate and weld it on? I've heard it's easier to drown a beaver this way than with a regular or offset jawed trap.

If they are legal in your state, like they are here, the #14 jump traps do a good job of holding beaver. I know a guy who uses them alot and does quite well. That said their used cost is comparable to the cost of new MB 750s and they are all you need for a beaver foothold IMO.

Great beaver trap.

'Great' is what I've heard, but I've shopped so much it's as if no one even makes them anymore. I can't figure it out. How can something effective b so hard to find. F&T doesn't even seem to sell a toothed trap.

They are almost all out of production these days. You'll have good success finding some used if you ask for them on the trap shed forum here.

Bubble welds across the jaw face

Are they usually jump traps or are coil spring toothed traps available?

http://www.livestockprotection.net/traps01.htm#steel

There are some longsprings.

I don't recall any factory coilspring traps with teeth, at least none that have been popular.

Not my pic but something like this

I've got Onieda victor 14 jumps with teeth for about 25$ on the trap shed. Plan on Getting more this next few weeks

Toothed beaver traps that are older production include

Oneida 'Victor' # 14 jump, single under spring. Expect to pay $20.00 to $30.00 each

Newhouse # 14 double long. Expect to pay at least $90.00 for stock traps. Less with modified chains, et.

Newhouse # 48 double long. Expect to pay at least $75.00 for stock traps. Less for modified ones.

You should have no problem finding used #14 jumps. eBay, the Trap Shed, trapping conventions.

No foot damage and very few pull outs from toe caught beaver with toothed traps.

I'm looking for new. I didn't realize those long springs r so costly and that they probly aren't manufactured in coil spring.

Except for Livestock Protection Company, I'm not aware of anyone currently making a toothed trap. You would have to but regular jaw traps and add "teeth" yourself.

The 3 traps I mentioned previously are no longer made. Production was stopped in the 1970s due to bunny hugger protests.

I suppose I could consider buying used, but I'm always partly afraid the springs are worn, for example.
By adding teeth myself, I assume u mean welding spots on them. I suppose that's an option.

I think you will find that even though they are old - many made over 75 years ago - many of the #14 and #48 Newhouse still have very strong springs. In fact stronger than some of the long spring traps made today.

If you inspect the traps before you buy or if you buy from a reputable dealer/company, you can judge the strength of the springs.

Nails, staples, any similar item can be welded on the jaws to make "teeth". Over the years, I've seen quite a few innovative setups.

Well, I use OV-14's for wolverine, and spring strength has never been an issue. However, they have cast jaws, so, a hairline crack in a jaw, (dry-fire?) is a remote possibility. I also use them for otter at times, and have a couple that are sporting about a 1/4" off-set, due to the otter getting tangled up and working the trap hard.
As an aside, the factory pan/dog leaves a bit to be desired. WOBBLY! All mine now have the PIT system.

Problem with toothed traps is they couldn't pass aihts or bmps because the injuries they caused were not within acceptable parameters of the injury scale 8 times out of 10.
Not trying to start a debate about traps, just stating the facts why they are no longer made.

Thanks

AJE, traps like the #14 and similar toothed traps are perfectly legal to use in Wisconsin as long as "such traps are located completely underwater at all times" (page 9 in the Wisconsin 2016 Trapping Regulations). So you can ignore Boco's pseudo-problem of following AIHTS, which doesn't apply in your state or any other state in the United States.

And those are the facts.

When WI was doing wolf studies they used 114s and 14 jumps to trap the study wolves. They started out with smooth jawed traps but had way to much damage so went to the toothed traps and that solved the problem.

I sold all my 14s for around 25.00 each. I still have 6 114s that are brand new and have never been set. They aren't for sale.

I run #14 jumps a lot. Open water on drowning cables and my favorite set under ice bait sets.

Mainer, He asked why they are no longer made,and I told him why.
Don't tell him to ignore facts.That is very arrogant of you,in fact quite priggish.

Boco lives In the world of OZ. LOL

If these traps are so damaging why haven't they been outlawed throughout the States?

Like I said before those traps were used for wolf research.
If you can find some use em.

Boco,
Actually, the production of the toothed traps mentioned, (#48 and #14 Newhouse were both stopped by 1976) ceased more than 20 years before AIHTS or BMP's, which as far as I recall showed up around 1998?? So I assume these two occurrences have nothing to do with each other? Set me straight if I am wrong? Also, looking back through the post, at no point do I see where the OP or ANYONE asked WHY toothed trap production ceased, as you stated.

I give you points, Boco, for using "priggish" in a sentence - nicely done!

Nevertheless, trapped4ever wins the internet today for his mic-dropping response.

If you want to be picky,I should have used the word available instead of made-just semantics really in one word.Well if you had read down a bit instead of just the first post he asked why they were not available anymore and hard to find.And I gave him the facts.Many companies stopped making traps for various reasons,same with newhouse but the designs were taken up by other companys.Not so with the toothed traps for the reasons I have given.
Many of the older toothed traps are collectable,but if you can find 14 jumps put them to use if you like if they are still legal.
Like another poster said there are many many options available today that do a better job.
I'll continue the discussion if you like later on,I have to go run a few traps just to see whats out there.I'm still gauging populations to decide what kind of line to run this winter.

Miss Nancy is absolutely correct.

A while back I bought a #14 Newhouse at a local flea market. Springs are as strong as the day they were made.

Mike

Boco, I'm confused again???? Are you claiming Newhouse #48's and Newhouse #14's were AIHTS or BMP tested? Weren't trap manufacturers required to pay for the testing process??? I don't believe the toothed line of Newhouse, #48, #14, #114, #2.5, #3.5 etc. were ever tested, as they were out of production long before AIHTS came on the scene??? Are you claiming they were tested and failed AIHTS standards??????!!!! Your earlier post makes a claim of something like 8 out of 10 times???? I find these claims interesting, as most wolf reintroduction efforts I'm aware of, claim the toothed traps cause the LEAST foot damage, due to the foot being held stable and not slipping laterally down the jaws. Are you suggesting this is a false claim? I'm curious where you have read any of the info you are citing, as I've never seen anything pertaining to the Newhouses being AIHTS tested? Thanks in advance if you have any info on the subject, and feel free to PM if you prefer?

Also, Sleepy Creek and LPC trap company in Texas are still producing toothed traps. LPC traps are VERY similar to many of the old #114 and #14 Newhouse, very good quality, well made traps, also available with rubber jaws.

Boco,
Re-reading your earlier post, I see you said toothed traps, and didn't mention any brand name or size. Maybe you just meant toothed traps in general?? Do you have any info on what brands and sizes of toothed traps were AIHTS tested?? I recall years ago you said the Y-MIR marten traps I mentioned, had failed AIHTS testing. Do you know if there is a list of the traps that have been tested, and failed, readily available?? Thanks

I don't c them on Sleepy Creek's site. I just emailed them to c if they still make them.

Beav,when Mn wolves were trapped and given to Wisconsin and other states.The 14 jumps were used as they were in your states
studies.
The teeth stopped foot damage caused by the feet moving in the jaws.The teeth in the 14s aren't impalers .
Tom

AJE,
I would try calling Sterling Fur, Trapper Art's, or putting an ad in the trap shed. I believe cohunt had some #14 jumps listed on the Trap shed earlier this fall, maybe PM him and see if he still has some?? I've always been able to find all I want for around $25 or less, each, used of course. For what you want, the #14 jumps, #48 Newhouse, or #14 Newhouse would work just fine. The #14 jumps are going to be easiest to find and cheapest. I've never seen or used a better stock foothold otter trap than the old #48 Newhouses, they are getting pretty pricey now though. There are lots of other good and acceptable otter footholds, but I've never seen ANY stock traps that I would say are better, or even equal to the #48 NH. Sleepy Creek was making a wolf trap with teeth last I was aware, but a phone call should give you an answer there.

T4E,They only publish those that pass,and don't rate them because they don't want to be seen as promoting one trap brand over another.
When Canada and the USA started testing traps,Canada concentrated on bodygrips and the states has concentrated on footholds.The USA has done some extensive testing and have a very good program in place.If you had a contact there they may publish data.

So are you aware if the toothed Newhouses or #14, #13, #12 Oneida Victor jumps were indeed even tested??

Yes, It states in your BMP's all devices were tested.

The 14 & 48 DLS's on this thread...would they be comparable to a #3 Bridger size wise?

Ttt

The OP originally asked if footholds with teeth provided an advantage when trapping beaver. I have used 48 Newhouse's and #4's with welded teeth on beaver (and otter) for about 40 years. Imo, yes, they do provide an advantage particularly when catching a beaver by the hind foot. I target for the front foot but the occasional back foot catch is inevitable.

Traps with teeth on the beaver line gives you a huge advantage. If you don't have traps with teeth you can always add some of your own design.
Those little nubs Wolfdog shows are a start but are lacking In shape and size. They don't need to be sharp or pointy. And they shouldn't line up from jaw to jaw.

Sleepy creek makes or did make a #5 long with teeth

Sleepy Creek does not recommend the 5 for water trapping so its not for beaver.

Before Michigan outlawed teeth I used a pile of 48 newhouses and 14 jumps,my favorite being the 48's but the 14's were considerably easier to set.Teeth on beaver traps are definitely an asset,but our DNR and trapping assoc.'s didn't see it that way.

There's alot of stuff our DNR an trapping assoc.'s don't see right...

I thought the number 5 sleepy creek was for decoration not use.

Assuming they can be found and purchased, are the Oneida 14 jump traps considered good beaver traps? The reason I ask is that I recall from years, ago, that some trappers felt the single under spring had a tendency to throw an animal's foot out of the trap as it closed. Opinions?

Great beaver trap.

Teeth make any beaver trap.... better.

Even a 330?

Yes even a 330.

Boco don't get this mod group started on body grips. Pretty soon they will be adding laminations base plating and center swiveling them. And when the springs get weak they will be adding helper springs. And maybe they will start 4 springing them. LOL

Reading about your experiences in a lifetime of trapping Beaver in the Ontario bush and leaning heavily on 330's has had me speculating about the difference between operating on remote/registered lines versus the free for all trapping (excepting private property)we have in the states.When I trapped beaver hard I ran into more beaver than I care to admit to that knew more about 330's than I did.Castor mounds set up with 330's would go untouched while the same set with foot holds produced.Dam spillways set with 330's almost always went untouched,I would pull the 330,replace it with a foothold and success.It got to the point where I was setting far more footholds than BG's.No disrespect intended,I just found beaver could be very cagy around half submerged BG's,and they often avoided fully submerged traps too on public land here.I couldn't believe how wiley beaver can be once they've had traps snapped off in their face or lost a few toes.

And I should have added that's where a trap designed for beaver,like a 14 jump or 48 newhouse came into play.These style traps do not fool around,once caught their in till you take them out.No "pullouts"with these.







'

Buck The south well SC and NC must be like Canada. In the 15 years I spent down there I might have set a dozen foot holds when trapping beaver. The 330 and the 280 were the go to traps In just about every situation.

That is interesting.More beaver trappers here in the north?Maybe with the current slump in the beaver market and newer generations of beaver we won't see avoidance.I should have mentioned its been a while since I trapped beaver exclusively.I got pretty proficient at foot holding beaver and loved working with traps made for beaver,the No.44 dls,44 underspring with teeth,and stock 4 newhouses all worked good.Actually then as now,a guy looking for an affordable trap with teeth would do well to look at the 14 jump,at approx.$25 a piece its the most affordable around.The other newhouses with teeth like the 114,14longspring and the 48's are all collector items.O'Gormans Wyoming Big Iron was a little pricey but was probably top dog.Really looking forward to chasing them this fall for the first time in years.

When we were young and had no money for real beaver traps. (before BGs) WE welded fence staples In #4 Herters coil springs. Can't ever remember losing a beaver In that set up. But they were like setting a time bomb. You didn't want to get caught In one. LOL

I always thought those No.4 Herters were awesome even without teeth added.For some reason they seemed much beefier and stronger than their 3's.While the No.3 Herters are a dime a dozen up here the 4's were always harder to find.Only ever had a few myself,I'd definitely use them if I could find any.Good beaver trap.

The old timer that I trapped with for many years told me that before 330's were invented in the early 50's,trappers would take one spring off their smaller bear and wolf traps to use for beaver.They liked the weight for drowning,they didn't need to tie a weight to the trap like with a no 4.Of course once the conibears and snowmachines came on the market they revolutionized beaver trapping for ever.

I am not a fan of the teeth just because I don’t see a need. In Minnesota you can garage sale them at $25 for the Victor jumps. When I buy auction trap lots I do not think they add cost to the lot a bit unless someone is specifically after them.

I use jumps solely on baited under ice platforms. Dale Torma taught me that.

Ran into TS-85s with nail teeth welded on at a County job this year. What a fear some device! I didn’t care to set that in muddy water and shutter at that getting a dog.

My impression talking to older trappers whom used them for the last 50 yrs was they did not want them sharp but the uneven edge was the reason they held. At least one company makes a squarish tooth trap, maybe even a hard rubber jaw. I see some canine potential in that worth studying.

Just a thought on this. What about using a Bridger #5 offset and filling in the offset with pieces of key stock to make teeth.

I had a PM from a trapper asking about teeth In traps. We discussed It and he came up with the Idea of using cement nails. And that's a great Idea.
Knock off the very end so they are a little more blunt and weld them In place. Or maybe just turn them around and use the head end. Weld In place then grind off what's left over on the outside of the jaws. This would allow you to hang onto the nail when welding It In place.

I have pondered this. Arkansas law states traps must be "smooth jawed" doesnt say "flat".
I couldnt use "teeth" but "lugs" maybe an option

your referring to the lpc ez grip trap.



Cool thing about this company is they actually make a replacement set of jaws for the Victor 3n traps is $15 a pair but I mean.

On a separate note for canine's I've talked to a live market trappers from here in Ms who welded but bless across this trap jaws along with a good size offset. He said that treat animals better than almost anything elese he's tried! Again he was a live market guy so minimal damage to the animal is paramount ! Said the only reason he stopped was because game and fish said they were technically teeth.

This isnt his but he did something similar.

Better checked LPC's updated prices...called recently and was shocked.

Has anyone tried checkering the jaw surface like on gun stocks?? If the paw can't move it won't get cut..

Those aren't teeth wolfie.
Teeth over lap the jaws when closed.

I believe those are best called traction nodules..

Most likely. LOL

That's a little known art, Wolfie...

In Minnesota it's legal, not sure about Wisconsin. You don't need teeth on a trap to hold wolf or beaver.
Does it work ? Yes. Just not totally needed to be successful

Legal in WI must be submerged at all times.

The 14 is tough to beat for under ice beaver trapping IMO. Didn't have any this past winter and had a pullout on a brand new #4 coil. Picked up a pile of them for next year. Like others have said, I've seen very little foot damage with these due to lack of back-and-forth movement along the face of the jaws.

I also remember the wolf study where a toothed trap produced the least foot damage of all designs. Funny how our assumptions can often be wrong when looking objectively at the data. I'm not sure you could make the same conclusions for all toothed traps....would like to see BMP results for those. I vaguely remember the wolf trap design having a limited number of teeth, does that sound right??? Would be neat if someone had a link to that study.

I don't know of a study but there was an article in the Trapper's Post by a researcher that talked about it,using the LPC #7.The teeth reduced edema.

I had a #14 stolen about 65 years ago(not in MI). Not legal in MI now.

if you can find the one done by T.t.turnbull they have some good info on the subject

Bus what you refer to in metal is named knurling. I've considered it but not tried.
Like on a ratchet wrench handle.

I still have a couple of those crimp on teeth from the 70s.
I did not use those for long.

Anybody have experience with the Blake & Lamb 44 double underspring traps? I recall some of the more experienced trappers in my area in the 70's and 80's used them. I think they were already out of production by the late 70's. Do they have the same jaw spread as the 44 double longspring? Are the springs strong enough for beaver?

I have some listed for sale on Ebay right now. Inside jaw spread is approx 5 1/2" x 6 3/4". The springs on mine seem pretty strong, but I've never used them for beaver.

I've used the old 44 under springs,still have some in fact.Decent beaver trap,only problem I had was buying ones with good springs.Those small leaf springs get weak and you really had no way to replace them.If you find some with decent springs they'll do the job for you.

Yes thats what I was refering to. Would not have to be much to keep the paw in place..

For you guys that have used or use them, are the Oneida 14 traps with teeth not as good as/the same as/better than the large coilsprings traps we have access to, today? Working from memory, I believe they have a 7" or 7 1/4" jaw spread.

The 14s are top of the line beaver traps. I've used them for 25 years or so. But the MB 750s are also great traps. I sold all my 14s years ago and went to the 750s. The 750s are just more versatile and can be used In states where you can't use a toothed trap.


Those clamp on teeth deals where just plain nasty. A critter doesn't deserve that kind of treatment.

Was re reading this the other day and got inspired, had a old #4blank in the pile and the springs where still crazy strong but somone has sharpened the jaws. A in litterly putting a beveled edge on them so I figured I couldn't make it much worse. Anyhow this whay I and up with.

Your skills are definitely improving ! Nice job Wolfie!

There shouldn't be an offset to beaver traps even with teeth. The teeth should be under the jaws. IMO

Not if the trap is set right , think about how the spring works in relation to how it's set. The 14 is a great beaver trap.

Totally agree with ADC.

Nice work Wolf.If you turn that trap upside down and clamp the jaws in a vice,you can bring that gap together a little better and it should be more parallel.I get the issue about the offset but I believe it could be made to work if the bumps are close to touching the jaws,all the way across.

Ttt one more time before going to the archives

Listen to ADC wolfdog. You would be losing most of the beaver with that set up. The teeth need to be on top or under the jaw faces.Back to the drawing board.

If any one decides to put teeth In their beaver traps look at using cement nails. They will give you a nice blunt type tooth and that's what you want.

Blake and Lamb....double under spring..got these when Someone wanted to sell their fathers stuff.

Dont step on that ,you'll get a sore foot.

I agree they don't meet the BMP and other parameters, but perhaps those parameters where a little subjective and emotionally driven to some degree.
It's accepted fact that a toothed trap can actually do less harm in some cases by allowing hemorrhaging to drain; apparently that is one of the reasons they used toothed traps when trapping the wolves that were relocated from Canada to Yellowstone Park. That's what I've heard anyway.

I have some #4 double long springs given to me that had heavy fence staples welded on top of the jaws, then cut off to about 1/2 inch. They are wall hangers at my cabin. I have also seen this done to #3 coil springs, trap had a bluegill tied to the pan, trap was screwed to short 2x8. The trap was set, trap and board was turned upside down and floated in ponds for snapping turtles. Tied securely of course. With the increase in Loons I could never do it. But trout pond owners and snapping turtles are mortal enemies.

I'm just curious how states actually 'allow' teeth on a beaver trap ?
I know when I was up in Minnesota , they did and I 'think' maybe , Montana, Alaska, Idk ?
Anyone remember the Wyoming Big Iron LS trap that O'Gorman used to sell, with the spring being like one on a kill trap.
I may be a little off on the name, but some of you may know. . .

I've seen pics of them. Dirk Miller recommended them in his book(had pics).
Wish we could use them for beaver. Lot less escapes

That’s a sweet trap.

Yep Wolfie, that's the one !!!

Ttt

Illegal in Virginia

It sounds like a well designed malleable cast tooth plate that could be riveted or welded on the underside of the jaws would have some demand.

Guys after trapping these nuisance beaver for a while now and traveling hours to a job, I can see why beaver trappers used teeth on their traps. I want EVERY advantage in my favor to catch the problem animal(s) and get DONE...stop the problem/damage. I say a trap like a #48 Newhouse...I like a closed jaw ( bigger jaw spread) might be the ultimate trap. Thoughts?

I like #14 jumps for beaver under ice. Due to not being able to adjust pan tension I don't use them open water anymore because of non-target catches. (Ducks)

Have you tried installing the Paws- I -Trip pans on them? They allow adjustable pan tension.

I have several big jumps with PIT pans. Really takes them to another level. I think I’m going to cut a little off one side of the pan so that the under spring doesn’t start lifting the foot up.

I always liked teeth on my beaver traps. Maybe that's why I've never seen the need for the big iron a lot of guys are using nowadays. Knew an old guy who used nothing but 48 Newhouses for otter. I like a closed jawed #4 for beaver, and while the #48 Newhouse would probably qualify for ideal in my book once it was set, the one problem with it (other than the price) is that you can't set it over your knee. A Victor or B&L, etc., I can break over my knee or thigh while standing in knee deep water, set and go. All my beaver traps have teeth welded on them unless I'm setting in some place like Oregon that doesn't allow them.

Love my number 14 jumps for trapping beaver.

I haven’t read beyond the first page so I don’t know what has been written before me. I don’t use traps with teeth because I’m afraid of the damage they’ll do to me if….

A couple years ago, the Cumberland boys and I discussed toothed traps. They said a lot of research studies use them. The teeth keep the foot immobilized between the jaws. That makes sense to me.

I knew 2 of the best beavers trappers here , 500-600 a year and they preferred the # 4 jump and quit using the 14 because of to many losses. This was pre pit pan days. A lot of misses can be attributed to loose jaw being lifted up as Johnny Thorp discusses. The foot picks loose jaw up goes under jaw lifts it then pan gets stepped on. I’m sure I’ve had this happen with a Brigger #5 dbl as trap sitting in bed snapped off with 4 lbs pan tension. If you want a toothed trap cut the ends off 20 penny nails and weld on.

I have some myself work good I highly recommend

I used polebarn spikes for teeth. My traps are offset and inside outside laminated with teeth on top. Most are # 5 bridger coils. My rivers are mostly shallow and rocky so no drowning just a long chain or cable.

So beav I saw you mentioned cement nails for teeth a couple times and was wondering if these masonry nails are what you were talking about.

Those will work. Wish I thought of those.

No what we were discussing, unless Gary misunderstood me, were the short stubby masonry nails. I have trouble with my limited welding skills to get them to stick without burning through them though.

Like this ky? They are probably a very hard steel being there made for concrete.

Yes exactly. I can’t get them to stick without melting with my little cheap welder. I figured the heads would flush up to the back side of the jaw and be perfect. You guys that weld. Is it me or the material? Charles Dobbins and Dirk Miller can’t be wrong.

You will need to remove any coating before you weld.

You should be able to find modified 48 Newhouse (not collector types) for$50.
I used to weld 20d nails on the underside of B&L, and Victor #4 LS traps with good success, especially when they were hind foot caught.

Why do so many weld teeth on the underside? I've often wondered that. I always welded them on the outside, and have never had a problem, and it is much easier to access to get a proper weld.

I'm assuming there is an actual reason to put teeth on the underside, rather than the topside, that is where most factory traps have them. I just don't know what it is, and was curious.

I’ve wondered the same, following.

Teeth positioned below the jaw and bent down slightly cause the jaws to close tighter as the foot pulls. Dig in so to speak. On a proper drown rig we do not need a lot of time to insure success.

Opposed to topside where when closing the teeth are facing up. Make sense?

I must be missing something here. You said they preferred the 4 jump to the 14 jump because they lost too many in the 14s. They are the same trap except for the teeth in the 14. I’ve used both extensively and always felt the 14 held better though I lost very few to either.

I’m not a 500 beaver a year man but I have caught a few. 200 on my best year doing control work.