|
|
Post by freeburgtrapper on Jun 30, 2005 12:41:59 GMT -5
how many different types of locks are there for cable restraints? ive seen the washer lock and various type of bends on it. are there any other and what are the differences and what are the best?
thanks matt
|
|
|
|
Post by Snareman on Jun 30, 2005 20:29:21 GMT -5
In WI and PA, the 180° reverse-bend washer lock is mandatory. It also scored excellent results for lack of fur/pelt damage in the WI studies. In MO, the same lock is suggested, but other locks were allowed, which was NOT a good idea. In live catching canines, you have to be concerned with fur/pelt damage as well as what could happen when something is caught. I've killed coyotes with no entanglement, no compression springs, using small locks and 5/64" cable. If this could happen to these coyotes, it could happen to a dog. You see a pic of the reverse-bend washer lock at PaCableRestraints.com www.pacablerestraints.comRight now, no other lock has been scrutinized and tested as thorough as the 180° reverse bend lock. While I know other locks would fair well for live catch, there are no tests. I would favor the larger 1/8" kieper lock on 3/32" cable figuring it would do well. There is the Relax-a-Lock too, but I have seen no testing results and no one I know of has used them extensively enough to get conclusive results. The main difference of the reverse-bend is how much of the surface area of the lock lays flat against the fur which makes for a forgiving lock, lays high on the pelt and displaces energy to a larger area. Snareman |
|
|
|
Post by freeburgtrapper on Jun 30, 2005 21:00:55 GMT -5
thanks snareman, sounds like that may be the best bet.
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jun 30, 2005 21:32:05 GMT -5
Not necessarlly the best bet.
If you take a camlock and some Stainless Steel 3/32 cable and add a stop button 10 inches from the cable end. This is as fine a Live snare as I have ever used. About the only time a coyote will be dead is if it hangs itself on a low limb or something similar. The SS cable will resist chewing a little better too.
FWIW
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by RallySnares on Jun 30, 2005 23:07:40 GMT -5
Steve,
But what would you have if you caught a Timberwolf or a 90# hound running full bore? Both more likely here,than a coyote.
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jul 1, 2005 14:55:19 GMT -5
Rally,
freeburg trapper is from Ill. I answered his question as per his location.(no wolves and maybe coonhounds to 65 to 70 pounds) For your location, and no coyotes, and wolves as the target, simply move the stop button farther away. I have lost only one dog in 40 years of snaring. Most will stop pulling and not choke themselves. And i have snared more than my share of dogs over the years. Although there are always exceptions to every rule, and NOTHING is 100% in this game.
With this setup I live snared many many coyotes with great success and only a few chew outs, and the one dog( a Great Dane by the way) That was not supposed to be loose and the owner appologized to me for causing ME greif! Hehe Figure that one out.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Snareman on Jul 1, 2005 15:23:41 GMT -5
The Camloc is about the worst live catch lock one can use. I often tell clients the Camloc is the industry's most aggressive lock and for very good reason. The reverse bend washer lock makes an excellent livecatch and was evident in WI's scientific studies where it was heavily scrutinized, the reverse bend came out shining in the necropsy studies -vs- the other locks. Why? Simple... as explained, it is a very flat laying lock as it rests against flesh, muscle and hide. It's wide surface area displaces force better than other locks resulting in no leather bruising both in the WI necropsy tests and in all furbearers caught on land or water not part of the test. On the other side of that same token, you have the dispatch. To dispatch, you want a smaller thinner lock that will ride deeper into the flesh cutting off venous flow due to it's smaller surface area. Bruising on these conditions aren't so bad because quickly dispatched animals are put down quicker, resulting in working the lock and snare less. There is also a 1 1/4" 90° bent lock washer lock that may work, but then you'll have the adjacent sides or corners pressing into the pelt and I don't know what the bruising on the pelt would do there, but suspect after a night of fighting without entanglement, there would be evidence of where the lock landed by bruising. Thinking about the cushioning of the neck fur of the coyote, I'm surprised how well the smaller locks dig in.
Snareman
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jul 1, 2005 17:00:25 GMT -5
Robert,
I agree with you in that the camlock IS the finest and most aggressive lock on the market! My point is, it is also a great Live Snare lock as well. When a stop button is added at the 10 to 12 inch mark, the camlock does not dig in. It stops at the button, but continues to stay locked and does not back off! A washer lock will be useless on a SS live snare after a few hours of the coyote fighting. The cable will wear out the hole and at some point in the night, the coyote will simply pop out of the loop. One of the many reasons I like my coyotes as dead as I can get them with a snare. But if I have to keep them alive, give me a stop button and a Camlock every time.
My opinion only, and as I said,
FWIW
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by freeburgtrapper on Jul 1, 2005 17:03:22 GMT -5
i guess the main thing here is the fact that the ''unpassed law'' that is on the gov's desk for signing states that the lock has to be a relaxing type lock. i guess i should have mentioned that. im not sure if the cam lock is a relaxing type of lock.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snareman on Jul 1, 2005 18:23:14 GMT -5
How many different type locks for cable restraints? In WI and PA, they only use the reverse bend which is backed by scientific testing. In MO it's highly suggested, but about any lock is allowed. MO decided to have a free for all and offer about any lock. For what it's worth and to show "What was MO thinking?"... they also allowed smaller cables for trying to live restraint coyotes.. which is a pretty asinine thing to do considering you're trying to live catch a canine with a high propensity for chewing. LOL!
The best? It's the 180° reverse bend washer lock. I comes with scientific testing.
How was the testing done? Each coyote caught was autopsied and the evidence showed no pelt or fur damage... and especially 0, notta, zilch, the big O... bruising. You can't have better scores than that.
The Camloc is the industry's most aggressive. It is an excellent lock for killing. It is NOT a relaxing lock... or should say it's the furthest from what a relaxing lock is, but each state has their own definition of what a relaxing lock is. Very few actually use the true definition of what you think one would be... "A lock that when the animal stops pulling, it backs off." Some state's definition is "A lock that when the animal stops pulling, it stops increasing tension." Well that definition allows any kind of commercial lock that is currently on the market. LOL!
When live snaring, you have to consider things like pelt damage, fur damage, leather bruising and edema. Wide big locks good, small thin locks bad.
Snareman
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jul 1, 2005 21:24:57 GMT -5
Wide big locks good, small thin locks bad.
Unless you use a stop button! ;D ;D ;D
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Snareman on Jul 1, 2005 21:42:07 GMT -5
Hello Steve! :-) Stop buttons are not an issue when it comes to live catching coyotes with cable restraints. People do not have the luxury to set the stops where they can at times... and they are also mandated to use certain types of cables. So the use of stops and other cables other than common 7x7 and galvanized cables are mere side issues that does not help the original poster in his questions. Now, if it were about the live coyote market and it comes with data about the necropsy or at being able to see visuals of the leather after being put up, then we got something. Some of the flaws with CR's is that other states are adopting what has found to already be working, which is a good thing, but also stymies progress on the testing of other locks and cable types.
Small locks for cable restraints are definitely without a doubt, a bad thing.
Snareman
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jul 2, 2005 0:30:02 GMT -5
Robert,
Dont blow a seal! I only got a couple thousand coyotes with my system and all were in very good condition. No snare damage to the critters. Cant afford that to happen. I just use what works for me and my system works! Got nothng against the reverse bend lock. Great lock. I have killed a pile of fox and coyotes with it over the years. Also have nothing against people using what they want to use. If it works for you, then more power to you is my motto.
"how many different types of locks are there for cable restraints? ive seen the washer lock and various type of bends on it. are there any other and what are the differences and what are the best?"
thanks matt
Just trying to answer this young mans question. Other locks for CR, differences, and what is best. Again I state that these are my opinions on this subject.
".People do not have the luxury to set the stops where they can at times... and they are also mandated to use certain types of cables."
This is where the Problems start to come in. People with limited knowledge telling the rest of us what and how to do something, when something better is out there. I have always said, "how do you tell someone who dont know; they dont know". Very hard to do.
I'll be quiet now and take my toys and go home. Hehehe
FWIW
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Snareman on Jul 2, 2005 6:45:20 GMT -5
I'm just keeping the post on track considering this is about cable restraints.
Exactly my point! Here we have a superior lock for the job and then the explanation of the industry's most aggressive lock to be used as a live capture lock?
Why even bother using this lock for dispatch? It was originally meant for beaver, but the testing shows it ended up being a great all around pelt friendly lock without the aid of any stop or cushioning devices, etc. As for dispatch, people would be hard pressed to find a worse lock for the job.... but here the camloc would shine.
Often when people talk, if they start saying things that don't add up, I'll start questioning the situation. Often I have to consider the source and look for legit reasons and conclusions why things work if I can't conclude it myself and rely on some of the best guys in the industry that know what they're doing. A good source I relied on in this situation is documented necropsy studies... a firm source. Everything I've said thus far is right on since we're talking about cable restraints and live catching coyotes using the techniques that are offered legally to the people who are mandated in using them. I also speak directly in correlation to the question, since I know the deal going on with IL and adjusting stops of any kind are not an option.... especially in the live capture of both coyotes and fox. As for the camloc, it will never make it in the cable restraints as there are far better locks for the job. I have yet to meet anyone who is cable restraining who feels comfortable setting a limit stop that will only catch coyotes, but let all the fox go. They're comfortable catching whatever comes up the trail first and if that happens to be a fox, then great. If the camloc was a good device for live capture, it would not need a stop or any other device to compensate for it's shortcomings for live capture. The reverse bend did not need a limit stop to have the excellent results it did...it passed on it's own merits using inherent qualities of the lock itself.
IL is not really introducing cable restraints anyway. They have taken a documented live capture device with accepted methods to introduce to legislation a tool that about any lock can be used WITH entanglement. They are in fact introducing snares, but under the guise of calling them cable restraints to try and be more politically correct. IL is not introducing cable restraints. They are introducing snares. Since this is fact, it really makes no difference at all what lock is used. LOL!
Snareman
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveCraig on Jul 2, 2005 10:28:53 GMT -5
Robert.
Please understand where I am coming from. Back when I stated snaring and experimenting with snare wire, cable , and various locks , there were none of the Polictically Correct lingo we have today such as "cable restraints, entanglement, Live capture devices, dispatch , etc,.etc. Only snares.Then they began to call them the "self locking snare". We called it "brush" for what some call today entanglement. We called it killed for "dispatch. There was no "live snaring back them. Only snaring and the goal was to kill the animal in the snare! The first time I ever heard about the reverse bend lock was in 1981! Len Pavek wrote about it in his book "Snareman". He called it the 135 degree lock. And believe me it was not developed as a "cable restraint" locking device for beaver. It was designed with a whole nuther intent in mind. The "reichart" lock is nothing more than a 135 degree Pavek lock. I call it the Pavek lock. He gave credit for it to the Alberta Trappers.
Illinois may not be looking into stops as an option, but I believe this is a mistake as long as they are required to keep their critter alive. Relaxing locks still "kill" animals. This is a fact of snaring, or "cable restraining" whatever the PC term is these days.
"The reverse bend did not need a limit stop to have the excellent results it did...it passed on it's own merits using inherent qualities of the lock itself."
I am not argueing this point. I allready know this from years of field experience. I was just describing another way to make a "cable restraint" ( live snare) using a camlock and still allow a leg or foot caught deer to get out. You cant do this with a reverse bend lock without the added use of a BAD. Nothing more, nothing less. I hope Freeburgtrapper comes away with a little more understanding of this subject and gets an answer to his original question of:
"how many different types of locks are there for cable restraints? ive seen the washer lock and various type of bends on it. are there any other and what are the differences and what are the best?"
thanks matt
Hope this helps you
Steve
|
|
