Your magnetic field will be consistent when you set a trap. How deep you put the trap or the trap is under the water hot conditions or rain make something that’s consistent inconsistent. I found the cage trap was’s the best way to find out about magnetic fields. It can be set above ground or in the water and then going through iit field can be measured and will stay relatively same While set.Even how close the trap fieldis or the devices to the person or animal makes a big difference even 1 to 2 inches.

This is all very fascinating. I wonder about powder coating. Perhaps that may hide the magnetic field.

I'm moving ahead with my book on mind reading coyotes, and their ability to detect the magnetic field, with telepathic siphoning of
trapper brain waves.

They are way ahead of proximity detection, please buy my book now so I can explain it all, since science really can't.

Beav Ask about that yesterday. I haven’t tested any traps before and after that were powder coated that were foothold.I did have a friend come by that had some traps or powder coated that had low readings. I am not sure the maker I know what I think it is I would have to ask him to be sure it was over a year ago. There are coatings that claims to mask radiation. I wouldn’t be giving you a incorect answer Just speculation. It’s best to test the trap yourself under your conditions. With cage traps it doesn’t matter whether the trap is powder coated or not On the traps that I tested. The ones that were five years old and caught 100 animals tested below or better than traps that were powder coated better than what I’ve done in the past.

What I have discovered will make some patents in accurate.Claims that were made will be proven not true. Some statements That were made in the past will be exposed as being not true ,a person may truly believe what he was doing but he was proven wrong with what I wrote in the book and how traps now can be tested. It will effect trap suppliers and trap makers and whole factions of industry. The book I wrote exonerates round up in the billions of dollars in suits that were involved with Bayer. Research what I wrote in my book about trapping devices and about the lawsuits Bayer has against them. You will find at I have said and stated to be very accurate and helpful to all industry that’s why I named the book what I did.Many Will discredit and attack so that few people can learn about what I’ve written. What I discovered will promote and confirm the best trappers. Some will be doing what he book contents confirms not to be true ,that sell products. Read my book so that you can understand when attacks takes place.I know this sounds crazy but as you can see some of it is already started.Since I published my book and giving information to Bayer there has been no money paid in settlement.The EPA Has confirmed round up safe.

I’m not attacking anything or anyone, I do want to be clear in that. I am just sharing my direct observations with a trail cameras shooting video on magnets in places I want to keep animals away from. I was testing very strong magnets to see if they repel any animals. These magnets are around 1.5 Tesla and fairly large ( so they have a high Weber value, Weber is a unit that also measures the size of the magnetic field, a large 1.5 Tesla magnet can lift more steel than a small one). Think big “metal fishing” magnets. 1.5 Tesla is 25 times more than 60 micro Tesla, and 37 times the field of 40 micro Tesla which is a big variance in magnetic field especially when very near the the magnet. Animals would routinely put their feet and bodies within an inch, and often actually touched the magnets. Not one showed any avoidance, ever. At any distance. I really wish the results would have been different. You’d be seeing adds for my “beaver repeller” devices. Instead I’m writing this sob story of crushed dreams. Sympathy anyone? Anyone?????

I feel your pain. I've had what I thought were ingenious ideas that didn't pan out. You get all excited then when u test it flops.

I will say this, I've put in 7 test sets to see if a bedded trap affects how a coyote works a set and I'm seeing strong evidence that it does. I'm going to keep making them to get a larger sample.
Here's my results so far.

Thanks for taking the time to share, Yes sir.

I absolutely was not making any reference to any person that I quoted and responded to on this thread or any previous thread that I’m aware of that I’ve posted on Trapperman recently or within the last two or three months. I’m sorry that it was taken that way.

That is very good to field test that way. I've noticed to on my line. Seems there are times they almost know. I do bed extremely tight. Just when I examine the foot pattern in sand or snow it's very interesting. Anyone ever think maybe has alot to do with the covering? If dirt feels different over the trap, it could arouse curiosity to dig or avoid?

Ray Milligan wrote about patterns and his teachings in professional instruction. About the absolute necessitie or digging the trap bed to be just big enough for the trap to fit in. He would have the student get on their knees and approach the set until they felt the loose soil outside the trap jaws. He taught them to have as little disturbed soil outside the jaws as possible. He didn’t want the target animal to feel any difference in the soil around the trap until the last step. Just a thought, he was one of the big numbers guys back I n the boom days. Yes Sir, on the test sites without a trap did you dig a bed and refill it like you would if a trap was present? Will go back and reread your post for that part.

I did dig a trap bed and refilled in front of the baited hole without a trap. Also I'll mention that by working with nonfunctioning trap I can bed it really solid even over the pan

The firmer the soil is around the jaws of the trap the less of magnetic intensity disbursement. The looser the soil the greater the chance of the magnetic intensity being expelled.I believe that’s why Mark Zagrrs method works so well with the dead grass over the set.He makes it firm with every set sometimes you can’t because of the soil. The dead grass would make up the difference to a degree.The dead grass block The field emissions and give reason for the soil being loose or not firm

I like to have a large trap bed. I feel that a very small trap sized bed pin points the trap location. And has some critters digging from the get go.

Kirk - this really interesting to me as I got a lesson this year coyote trapping. Not sure what the lesson was but my confidence was beat up. I had better territory and more traps but this year I caught less than year 1.
Only 3rd year setting for coyotes but something changed. Sets not even worked, just plain dead but I set on fresh sign or locations that had been great.

So what changed? Could be a number of things. But I did swap out the cable stakes for chain and welded the j hooks about a month before setting. I am really wondering if this may have contributed to my lesson? How long before magnetic fields dissipate?

Also - driving the cable stakes was rough with 6” of hard frost. Bent two drivers. This probably added to the magnetic field?

Test a trap like you had it set up last year. See if there’s a difference. If you bought new traps that are different that could be the situation. How are you positioning the trap. If that has change that will make a difference. Did another trapper trap there last year or close by.?If it’s the magnetic field intensity you should have more dug up traps. Then you did last year.

The magnetic field does not dissipate it is what it is. If you do have a high intensity it helps to have more backing and a deeper set.

Kirk just ordered the book. Very interested in this. I run a sloped trench set with the trap on a steep angle. Caught all age groups of yotes in it. All are buried up in the corner of the trap with about 2 out of 10 double footed. I did find that the dia of the hole per trap size was very important. Reckon the angle affects the magnetic field?

When I read, "In my book I explain in detail why control group study will not work or be accurate. You have to read the book from start to finish to really understand. I explain in the book throughout the book by using inconsistent consistent inconsistencies,." all credibility went right out the window.
What did become clear to me, is that there is absolutely no scientific basis to any of this, and someone is trying harder to sell books than prove a theory.
I use the term "theory" loosely, as there isn't enough scientific method in this proposal for it to considered anything more than a hypothesis.
I have a big problem with it being presented as though it were proven fact.

You obviously haven’t read the book. I was making reference in the book to magnetic fields and all forms of radiation referring to testing that was done concerning Bayer,s Round Up. Read the book!