I have seen 330's used set flat on the ground on trapping shows in the far north. Has anyone else seen this and has anyone else tried it. In Michigan it would be illegal to set them on dry ground. If you legally could set them on high ground, could they work for Coyote, Fox, or Coon. What about beaver in the water ? I was thinking of trying this on a few water beaver sets.

Maybe so, but I have seen this set catch Lynx in the Arctic in the snow.

Use the right tool for the job. If you want to catch something by the foot, use a foothold. If you want to catch something in a BODYGRIP, set it correctly to catch them on the BODY! You wouldn't set a MB 750 to catch a mink across the head....

This discussion already happened about a year ago. Just use the right tool.

all you need is 1 thing you did not foresee happening to become a huge black eye for our sport.

This is just a terrible idea.

tried it, don't work for beaver.. But for fox/coyote in deep snow it does but can't in the lower 48.

The Meat trapper has a youtube vid where he caught a beaver at a dam set with a flat 330, but although doable I'd stick to the right way.

Youtube and trapping,well.

Dunlap shows it in his dvd using 280 belisle on a drowner.

I know someone who just yesterday set a 330 flat over a camouflaged hole in the ground in order to catch a two legged tweeker who's been stealing stuff from around his place.

i had to read that twice,thought it said twerker and i got nervous.

Hope he used a hot bait, nice shinny piece of jewelry,LOL

After what I’ve seen with full closure 330s and beaver feet, I think it’s a terrible idea. Yeah, I get it that it’s supposed to grab more than just a foot, but I would expect only catching a foot would happen at times. When it does, it’s not good.


In my experience, a beaver caught by both front feet in a full closure 330 will usually be there, but beavers with only one front foot won’t be there for long, and the foot left behind will tell the story.

That was a 220

the perp will be twerking once the 330 is on his ankle

This

And It's not fair to the beaver.

Would it be a different story if said 330 where on a drowner?

No. Imo. Footholds are designed to hold, bodygrips to kill by crushing. Bodygrip on a limb is bad. Under ice i care less because the mechanism is drowning, so a foot or tail is fine under ice. A drowner is better on paper but in practice its better to use a restraining trap as intended, and a dispatch trap as intended. An incidental in a foothold is something we can deal with. An incidental in a 330 is a broken leg. Many people, myself included go to great lengths to avoid coon reach ins. Not considered humane

Do as you wish but realize that you are not just representing yourself when you set a trap.

My guess it was folks who know nothing about trapping and wanted to be famous

That Isn't the case. There are some recognized trappers that actually recommend using body grips on dry land
and targeting a foot or leg.
I have a system where I use a 160 In the horizontal position In the water. But It's a rat catching system where 99% of the time the rat Is suit cased.
Using them on dry land to target a leg In my opinion Is just asking for trouble.

I would not entertain the use of 280 or 330 BGs on land as footholds, but either set in water for back foot catches on a drowner works well. Those of you that say it won't work well or that it is bad on the beaver, compared to a 7" or more jaw spread foottrap are simply wrong.

The problems are when you catch one by the front foot. The results of a front foot catch are not fair to the beaver.
It's happened to me twice and It happened when the beaver were climbing over the trap.
And I know for sure that a foot caught body griped coon Isn't a pretty sight.

I am somewhat surprised by the reaction to my original questions. I am pleased to see the variety of reactions to this subject. One of the fun parts of trapping, is that I am constantly thinking and dreaming of new ways to out smart the prey that I try to catch. I do not think of this as a bad thing, but rather a healthy way to approach any pursuit. It keeps trapping fun for me. I am not a big time trapper with large numbers of pelts to credit to my name and know all the answers. The fact that we as trappers have this Forum to use as a sounding board for ideas is a credit to the originators of this medium. Thanks The benefit that we have with a tool like this Forum, is to think out loud to fellow trappers and gain from their experience and hard work. It sure worked this time. You brought up some things in this discussion that I had not thought about when I posted this subject. It showed the passion for our sport that many of you have. I have had a lot of ideas about new ways to implement the different actions and talents that are needed to make up todays trapper. That is how trapping will hopefully continue and thrive into the future. I plan on continuing to think of new ways to do things and keep trapping fun for me. Certainly, the majority of my new ideas eventually turn out not to be good ideas. But once in a while there is a winner in the bunch and if you don't keep thinking up and discussing new ideas, will never find the good ones. Thank you for your thoughts. In this case, my new idea will not get past the thinking stage.

about the second "reacher" coon i ever caught stopped my days of baited bucket's dead in their tracks.dumped all the 160's i'd just bought.

Lots of variables here.
Never had problem with reach ins with baited buckets when bait was in the far back of bucket and thr trigger wires were spread apart.
I've caught some coon by the foot climbing over 160's and 110's, no problem(24 hr check laws here).
What in sam hill is the difference in jaw width(not spread) of a 4.5 sleepy creek compared to a 330, 280,220? Both types of traps "clamp" on whatever trips them.
A well known trapper used to set #4 lonsprings in front of pockets for mink with the loose jaw forming the arch at the top of the pocket, makes a body grip out of a #4.
I see no problem using a bodygrip on a positive drowning system

I can see little value to using a body grip in a manner it was not designed for when the correct tool already exists for holding legs..... You’d be better off making a regular body grip set that uses the trap correctly.

I don't think you will find any bodygrips set as a foothold in any trapping manual.And there is a reason for that.

Another issue is the possibility of getting junk caught in the jaws of the trap on the side of the coni facing the ground. A stone or stick in the jaws can cause the other side of the trap to not close properly. As the trap goes off it will jump off the ground and the jaws will have a good chance of grabbing whatever is on the ground under the trap.

For me, reach ins with coon were solved completely by going to 22" deep boxes with the trap at the front in slots and the bait right in the back. If there is no chance of being able to grab the bait, they will try to walk in closer first.

And swamp wolf, I don't think anyone is saying it wont work, or wont work well..just too powerful and not designed for it and he cons out weight the pros of using a foothold. I would list the following points as negatives

-increases the risk of bad things happening in the case of an incidental
-a lot of weight and leverage on the trap itself causing broken bones.
-a conibear, even on a drowner has a lot more metal, springs, etc that can catch on exposed roots, tangle in wire, catch on rocks, etc and prevent going down the drowning wire, wheras a foothold has less chance of this
-Angle of pull. A conibear is not baseplated and the angle of pull can cause more damage (some footholds aren't as well)
-should you not want a drowner, a laminated, or laminated offset trap is WAY easier on a foot than a coni, which arent laminated
-a coni has a good likelihood of a high up catch, meaning more discomfort for the animal caught. An animals feet are tough, an animals thigh not so much. Foothold, not leghold.
-less chance of chewing in a foothold
-chance of debris catching in opposite jaw and preventing a catch

Some points are weak, but collectively, I find that its just not a great idea.

I mentioned under ice earlier, A drowner is about as fast, but under ice stuff happens. I always am nervous setting the magnum conibears on shore where someone could drive by in a boat and see a poorly caught critter stuck in a trap. Granted, that did not happen this year, or last year, however it has happened where a critter has been caught by a tail, or shoulder and I have worked hard to mitigate this with good success. Setting purposely for this doesn't fit my pursuit of humane trapping, drowner or not.

Most everything y'all said exactly describes big beaver footholds too.

And what trapper with any level of experience would set a BG flat without researching how to do it effectively? Grabbing debris, hanging up. Please. Dang guys.

I'll keep using them in backwoods situations that are legal and safe and when I need the beaver caught now.

As Clint Locklear says, it may not be playing fair but it is super effective.

Yes, I saw a man on the show life below zero, set what looked to be a 330 horizontally in a snow drift, but he was eighty miles or more by snowmobile from the nearest village. I seem to recall the trap wound up rapped around a lynx. Maybe he will chime in on why he did it that way. I am neither condoning nor condemning his actions. None of my business, but in that part of the world the odds of an incidental are zero. Here in the lower 48 no way no how even if it is legal.

This is so stupid!

Only to you.

Only to me eh? I beg to differ that.

X2

You guys keep doing it like you think it should be done and so will I. As long as something is legal and works well and can be done safely and effectively I'll do it.

There is not much difference between a Belisle 280 or 330 and a big beaver foothold jaw spread and clamping force.

Set one of these flat BGs on my special supports underwater on the muddy edge of a beaver dam where you can't easily bed a foothold and shazam!!!

For an experienced trapper to use this tactic is one thing, to say on here that it is good to go, with all the masses looking is quite another.

I know guys were doing it here to escape the small spread laws.
They were not preaching it at the trappers ed though.

Ask the State Association PR guys their opinion while in a group.

It takes time to learn technique. Folks today want to be fed info and hit the ground running.

I'm not going to argue, that is just my couple cents. And I'm no 330 hater lol.

I 100% agree with this, but the exact same angle could be said about any aspect of trapping...using snares, using bigger jawspread for coyotes, etc.

I've heard some fellers swear to this method. Ain't never tried it myself but I don't see why it wouldn't work. Like Swampwolf, I see no difference in a coni layed flat or a wide jawed foothold in water. Both achieve the result desired by holding the beaver by the foot. See nothing unethical about this practice.

I've been thinking about it, and I've changed my stance on it. In certain situations, where non-targets aren't a danger, and the trap is set deep, it very well may be the ticket, as long as safety was considered. I'm just saying I won't completely rule it out as a viable method for a seasoned trapper to use, it's just another method to use in specific circumstances that should not be taken lightly or attempted by novice trappers.



I will however say that I won't be using it shallow the way that trapper showed you youtube. I would only try it in deep water, going for a back foot/body catch, set on a drowner to make it a lethal set, if I ever try it at all.

I have set 330's with hardware cloth added to the trigger to act as a large pan, flat IN WATER to act like a suitcase trap, and it worked fine.

I’ve given it more thought. I’m on board.

How long does somebody have to be doing something for them to be experienced? If inexperienced, how does one become experienced?

I don't know any experienced trapper that would ever use a bodygrip like that.That is something that a rookie might do until he learned how to set bodygrips the way they are designed for.
You want to catch an animal by the foot there are loads of sets available with the traps designed to do it humanely.

Carolina, you forgot to quote the rest.

Ask your NC TA PR director, and the NTA and FTA ones too, and get back to us.

I got bear traps to check, so n so on the net said they work good for beavers, so it has to be truth.

I think I'll just stick with 330s well supported in an up-rite position. That's why there called bodygrips...

I use Belisle 280s set shallow on a drowner to deep water. Works same as a big foothold. Have caught 6 or 7 by front foot. Haven't lost one yet.

I use the Locklear pans made for this purpose. With these..the BGs are better than beaver footholds....that's why.

Your venture on the miss to catch ratio would be a loss. And what makes you think an 8" 280 would miss more than a 7.5 inch 750?

Have you ever fired a conibear lying flat on a firm surface? What did it do? Trust me..it'll grab the beaver.

Never tried it but if a guy built a stand that held trap horizontal I could see it shine in rain flooded timber in spring time.

Gotcha, I stand corrected. I know just the spot..

So i guess some of yall would never eat soup out of a coffee mug either

....or steep banks.

The one application I’ve thought about trying a flat BG is for hares in their jump tracks in deep snow, when snow buildup makes snares difficult.. Probably a 280. But I would want it to suitcase them, so it doesn’t really fall under the original question of using a BG as a foothold.

So do you need to set on a hard surface like sticks on soft bottoms? Or does it just work on hard bottom spots?? I'm certainly open minded enough to try, just need some perimeters, please,thanks