I had originally posted this on the general talk forum, moving it here for better match to the discussion.

I see we have until February 12 to comment on the new definition of “relaxing snare lock”.

I just spent some time trying to figure out what that definition is, and all I can find is that it is defined as:
“ The DNR interprets "relaxing snare lock" as a lock that releases pressure on a captured animal when an animal stops pulling.”

It appears to have already been changed on NWCO Rules, so it may have been done already as administrative code, and I don’t see it in the IAC code (state law) that I’ve found. It may change when the new code out after the rule change.

Can anyone out there help make sense of this? So if it allows the loop to open even 1/64 of an inch, is that legal? Does it mean that the loop must just be free to open up back to full loop size (that’s not a lock at all).

Anyone out there have this conversation with the wardens who will have to interpret this rule? Are they just going to give us a list of the allowed locks?

I did read the previous thread on this back in August, just wondering if we have any clarification. I sure do like Kentucky’s “one piece” definition. That seems much simpler.

Based on that definition, as long as it releases any pressure at all, its legal.

That’s what I think also. I was just dreaming up a device that could measure this. Even 1/32 greater circumference meets that definition.

I do agree with cattails that we would be unwise to push the limits, but why make this up to trappers to argue with law enforcement and potentially a judge.

The more I think about it, the more I like the “single component lock” way of defining it. No ambiguity in that. Otherwise we need a lock by lock directive from DNR.

I bet every single component lock opens at least a few thousandths of an inch when pressure is released. But I may be wrong about that?

I think you’re right, but proving a minute amount of “release” may be tough. I would think that as long as you can see the lock move over the cable as it releases, its good. Thats just an assumption of course. I think they write some laws with grey area with good intentions, but sometimes it makes thing harder than they need to be.

I don’t know of a single lock that moves backward along the cable. I’ve used reverse bend washers on both coyote and beaver and I’ve never had one actually slide backwards on the cable. Well not until it was used more than once and lost its “grip”.

Even the long tab relaxing locks don’t slide backwards on the cable, they just rotate the long tab to release some pressure. The hole does not slide backwards on the cable as far as I can tell.

I don’t mean move backwards, but as it relaxes the cable will move somewhat in the hole of the lock. I may not be wording that well, I just mean being able to physically see the lock “relax”.

With that definition nothing will be legal.
A lock can not "release pressure" nor can it apply "pressure", only the animal can do either.

The definition you want it that it ceases to tighten when the animal ceases to pull, but given the popularity of saying "pressure" try for Mo.'s definition, from the Mo. CR training manual- "Missouri regulations state that cable restraints must be equipped with a relaxing-type sliding lock, which stops exerting pressure when an animal quits pulling on it".
https://huntfish.mdc.mo.gov/sites/default/files/downloads/4157_6377.pdf (page 12)

That sounds as good as single component lock to me. I think the key is that it needs to be something anyone can easily assess. I can easily assess if a locks stops tightening when the animal stops pulling. I can easily assess if a lock has a single component.

This definition we have is not at all easy to assess. I fear we are about to have a new definition that is no better than not having a definition in terms of everyone knowing what is legal and having a way to know what is legal without arguing before a judge.

I just followed the links to comment on the proposed rule changes, and I can not even find a way to comment on the snare lock definition. Can anyone find that? If so I would like to comment if you ca tell me how.

I believe they are talking about the use of spring loaded snares or power snares

ALL LOCKS (with out spring) HAVE TO BACK UP TO LOCK. Yes even cams

Sounds like Ohio's snare lock law.

We went to a one piece closing device to alleviate any individual interpretation of what a “ relaxing” lock was. Too many different opinions by conservation officers. We also included no spring assisted devices in the change.

Newt, that’s exactly what I discovered when I started playing with measuring how much various locks “relax” when the animal stops pulling. It may only be 1/16th of an inch greater circumference, but they do in fact allow an increase.
Kytrapper - that is a very sound and reasonable rule. I also like “ceases to tighten when the animal ceases pulling”. Either remove ambiguity and are easily assessed. Single component locks are the easiest to assess IMO but either definition works.
I still can not figure out how to comment on this rule, so I suspect it is being done administratively. The potential upside of that is that an administrative rule is much simpler to change than IAC code.

Well I heard back from an administrative specialist about this. The rule was actually finalized in September 2019, and is not currently up for comment as the email the DNR seemed to suggest when I read it.

Here is the final wording:
"relaxing snare lock" means a snare lock that allows the snare loop to release constriction
pressure on the captured animal when the cable is not taut.

What a mess to interpret that! Does it have to release just some constriction, or does it have to loosen and stop constricting completely, which means it does not lock at all and just loosens until there is no more constriction. That would not be a lock at all, but a sliding loop that would be worthless for holding most animals. I have snared rabbits and squirrels with twisted loop “lock” in fine brass wire (they don’t lock at all, squirrels and rabbits just don’t get out of them, and they actually sort of do lock when the single strand wire kinks, would not be the same with cable), but certainly a cable with a loop for a lock would not hold animals on land.

I asked the specialist who administrates nuisance permits, and she has referred me to another specialist who can answer my questions more in depth.

Sometimes I have found its better to not ask, just read it as you think it is and go about your business. People forcing the DNR to define things often comes at a loss for trappers.

Yes I do get that. I guess as long as I’m not being fined that’s what I will do. But that definition is still ambiguous. And they have stated that some locks being sold as relaxing don’t meet this definition. I say either they all meet it, or none of them do - depending on how you interpret that definition.
Truth is I never did want it defined, but now that they have defined it I want to what locks I can still legally use under that definition.

You could end up with a list of one lock, the 180 degree reverse bend lock, like they intended all CR's to use. I know it doesn't function different than some other locks but most of us know more about snare locks than the people making the rules... as I'm sure you know. Good luck to you.

Michigan regs used to say washer style relaxing locks. Now it only reads relaxing locks. That leaves the interpretation to the conservation officer I guess. Don't matter to me right now anyhow cuz with work so busy I am not hanging any now. Bad thing is I am working a few miles from Northwoods Outdoors and they have cool stuff. I have already bought 20# flake was, new dirt hole auger, a dozen 330s, new muck boots, a dozen 110 h stands and am looking at a dozen #5:Bridger's next stop. By the way, they have ,5 dozen MB 550s 2 coil offset....look at me ramble when I was just posting about locks. Lol.

Well the DNR wildlife biologist whom I was told by the NWCO specialist to contact about questions regarding the relaxing lock definition was at the ISTA fur sale this past Saturday. I asked her and she seemed to indicate that if a lock was sold as “relaxing” it was allowed.

I do not know how this reconciles with the following quote from the link in the DNR email that says:

“ The term "relaxing snare lock" is used in the Indiana hunting and trapping guide, but some locks are being sold as "relaxing" that do not meet the DNR's interpretation, causing confusion and ambiguity. The DNR interprets "relaxing snare lock" as a lock that releases pressure on a captured animal when an animal stops pulling.”

She mentioned that the definition is at least partially based on BMP study results.

So I have decided I’m full circle here. I’m just going to do what I do, use what I use, and if I am ticketed for it I will take the ticket quietly and save it for the judge. I am confident that I could show any of the locks sold as relaxing do, in a measurable way, release some pressure on the animal, and I could show that with ANY lock that is not spring assisted, as Newt said. They can’t possibly mean that the lock must release all pressure since that would not be a lock at all, and no lock on the market would meet that interpretation of the definition.

"They just rotate the long tab to release some pressure " This is what their looking for. A micro relaxing lock cannot release as much pressure.