# Today I lost my best friend



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

While I was busy setting fox traps on a lake my dog found a 220 cubby set baited with beaver. She was dead by the time I found her.


----------



## Ravenlost (Jul 20, 2004)

Oh, that's horrible. I am so sorry!


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I'm so sorry.I caught Dog like that once,got Him fast enough but after that he knew where all my Traps were.

big rockpile


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2011)

Oh my heart is breaking for you..I'm so sorry! HUGS..


----------



## Ed Norman (Jun 8, 2002)

That's awful. I don't like the bigger conibears on land for that reason. Sorry.


----------



## OkieDavid (Jan 15, 2007)

Sorry for your loss.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I even deliberately tricked her into getting shocked by hooking my goat fence to a bucket set. It wasn't enough.

She was a great dog.


----------



## Raeven (Oct 11, 2011)

What a devastating loss. I am so sorry.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Sorry, that is a shame.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

I've lost many "best friends" over the years. Im sorry for your loss.


----------



## snake35 (Jan 24, 2011)

Sorry about your loss.


----------



## diamondtim (Jun 10, 2005)

Sorry for your loss.


----------



## oth47 (Jan 11, 2008)

Awww,man,what a rotten thing to happen.That's why I never liked conibears.


----------



## BoldViolet (Feb 5, 2009)

How horrible.  I'm so sorry.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

You have my sympathy.


----------



## Oldcountryboy (Feb 23, 2008)

That's why connibears are illegal to use here in Oklahoma. Too many hound hunters. They were legal at one time but the hound hunters got a petition up and going and got enough signatures to put an end to connibear traps. It's leg hold steel traps only. We can't even use snare traps. 

My sympathy for you also. I've been wanting to put out some traps nearby to catch the "too many" raccoons around here. But I'm afraid my little squirrel dog (rat terrior) will end up in one. I can't afford to take him to a vet if he gets a leg/foot broke.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I wish we could get them restricted to being used off the ground on pole sets or being completely submerged like for otter.

I know the trapper who killed my dog. He used to be a friend. I had 2 conversations with him about 220's and told him how much they scared me.

Hopefully the local paper will print my letter and that will encourage people to take action. I'm considering an online petition because I know there are lots of people who have lost dogs and cats to these traps in MN. I know of 4 and only 1 survived.


----------



## newfieannie (Dec 24, 2006)

I'm so sorry FH. that lovely dog!. i'll be keeping you in my thoughts. ~Georgia.


----------



## Chief Cook (Apr 24, 2011)

Fishhead, I am so very sorry to hear about your dog.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Thanks everyone. Losing her has been incredibly hard.


----------



## d37fan (Dec 22, 2004)

Sorry for your needless loss. I was out onetime with my dog in a pretty public area and she got caught in a snare. Luckily she is calm enough and didn't fight it till I found her. That's a feeling I don't want to have ever again.


----------



## gaucli (Nov 20, 2008)

awww...that is so sad. So sorry for your loss. It is really a very hard thing to go thru.


----------



## sevenmmm (Mar 1, 2011)

Tough to read. I feel bad for you.


----------



## snake35 (Jan 24, 2011)

There is nothing wrong with using connibears on private property. As far as houndsmen go, I had running problems with the bear hunters wanting to slip on my posted property. They just drive up and down the road till their dogs strike. Then they turn them loose. After shooting six of thier dogs, no more problems.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

This happened on public land. 

We should not be allowing people to plant landmines on public land and that is EXACTLY what 220's are.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

Sorry for you dog.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

I'm sorry for your loss. Still, people should have control of their dog at all times! Wherever..., even on public land, especially during trapping season. Body grips are an effective means of wildlife control wherever they are set. You start off outlawing body grips on the ground, then they want them completely outlawed, along with leg holds, and snares. You, as a trapper should know this, it's only a small step to get the rest. Guard your rights, and accept your responsibilities to guarding them.

It was a risk you understood to be there, although you took precautions, it still could have been avoided.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Obviously you know nothing about grouse or pheasant hunting. 

The only way to avoid it is to quit hunting on public land. Other states allow trapping and protect dogs by requiring 220's to be placed off the ground and the trappers do just fine. It's not that hard.

Make me choose between hunting and trapping and trapping loses. I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of MN dog hunters feel the same way.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

Fishead... once again I'm sorry for your loss. Still, it was a risk you took, and understood. That body grip trap is responsible for taking way more predators to the pheasant and grouse population than you and your dog, or combined with the other dog losses, including unwanted feral animals. These traps help preserve the hunt that you want! Yes.. it's a shame that you lost your dog!

I'm sure the population of birds that you hunt, thanks the body grip trap for the population they have, as well as those who use them, as well as other traps and snares! 

Do as you like. Trapping and hunting are both tied very closely together. If we give up one, they will soon be trying to take the other.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Lots of states require 220's off the ground or underwater. There are also alternatives like dog proof **** traps that are easier and faster or just regular footholds or snares. We can use any of those so 220's on the ground are completely unnecessary.

Killing dogs hurts trapping plain and simple.


----------



## starjj (May 2, 2005)

I am so sorry for your loss. Remember it is easy for others to say you should have done this or that. Sometimes we should remember to just say I feel bad for you.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

Unnecessary to use, in your opinion because you lost your dog? You spoke of people with lost dogs and cats.Yet, how many of them are out running feral? You, admittedly were setting fox traps, with a loose dog. Why is it someone elses fault, other than your own?


----------



## ne prairiemama (Jan 30, 2010)

I'm very sorry


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

United we stand divided we fall. You knew the risks of letting your dog run free in the area.


----------



## Ed Norman (Jun 8, 2002)

The intelligent and well-informed politicians are just as likely to ban bird hunting in order to prevent dog deaths. Then what?


----------



## billfosburgh (May 20, 2009)

snake35 said:


> There is nothing wrong with using connibears on private property. As far as houndsmen go, I had running problems with the bear hunters wanting to slip on my posted property. They just drive up and down the road till their dogs strike. Then they turn them loose. After shooting six of thier dogs, no more problems.


gee you wouldnt last long around here, you kill 6 dogs here & the "no more problems " wont cut it. your problem would get worse for sure in a hurry


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

littlejoe said:


> Unnecessary to use, in your opinion because you lost your dog? You spoke of people with lost dogs and cats.Yet, how many of them are out running feral? You, admittedly were setting fox traps, with a loose dog. Why is it someone elses fault, other than your own?


because that style of trap infringes on other peoples right to use PUBLIC land (because even granola munchers & their dogs have a right to access PUBLIC land even during trapping season). i'm a huge defender of trapping but using any kill trap in a way that doesn't exclude freeroaming dogs is just stupid & a good way to get ALL trapping banned.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

snake35 said:


> There is nothing wrong with using connibears on private property. As far as houndsmen go, I had running problems with the bear hunters wanting to slip on my posted property. They just drive up and down the road till their dogs strike. Then they turn them loose. After shooting six of thier dogs, no more problems.


FENCES, FENCES, FENCES
if the bear runs across your property the dogs will follow. everywhere i've ever run dogs your behavior would cause more problems not solve them. whether you go 40 acres or 400, shooting someone's dog for running game across it would get you burned out in some places.
unless you are LITERALLY sitting on your property watching them dump dogs on your property & shooting them as soon as they're dumped, you're wrong headed. you are certainly going to find yourself w/ real problems sooner or later.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Minnesota allows several dog safe alternatives to 220's.

Minnesota doesn't allow 330's on land so your argument about a slippery slope is bogus.

Killing someone's dog does more harm to trapping than the reasonable restriction of not allowing 220's on land like many/most states. Just wait until some legislators dog dies and then see what kind of trapping restrictions get written into law.


----------



## snake35 (Jan 24, 2011)

When you do not turn your dogs loose till you are on posted land it is a mute point. I run cattle on my property, so according to the sheriff I am in the legal right. Why be scared of idiots to lazy to get out of the vehicle to hunt. I did not shoot the dogs before repeatedly warning them. Then Shot their dogs in front of them.


----------



## billfosburgh (May 20, 2009)

shoot my dog in front of me = your gonna have a BAD day, if you have another day


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

snake35 said:


> When you do not turn your dogs loose till you are on posted land it is a mute point. I run cattle on my property, so according to the sheriff I am in the legal right. Why be scared of idiots *to lazy to get out of the vehicle to hunt*. I did not shoot the dogs before repeatedly warning them. Then Shot their dogs in front of them.


this just shows your ignorance of dog hunting. the dogs go where the bear goes & the hunter goes where the dogs go. the average dog hunter will cover more ground in a day than the average stand hunter will all season.

i have no problem w/ anything else regarding the situation. they chose to be jerks & left you no choice. i'd still be careful though.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

I do see your poiint, I still believe people should know where their dog is at, and have control of them, that would eliminate most of the problem. Free roaming dogs and cats have no business there in the first place. Rights are usually gradually taken, because of foolish accidents, and people demand legislation to curb they're anger. Fishead made a comment in another post that he will be seeking 220 sets to destroy now, and has lost a " trapper friend", but if he'd kept track of his dog while making fox sets, it more than likely woudn't have happened. Sure he lost his dog and it hurts, but he knew the dog was at risk there.

If they were outlawed on public and the dog strayed onto private, it still would be a trappers fault. It will be the same with leg holds and snares when someone finds their dog or cat caught, even if they were at fault!

You gonna start giving up your rights, it snowballs over time. Colorado has an amendment to the state constitution prohibiting any kind of trapping due to bleeding hearts along the upper front range. Now they're losing their housepets to predation in their yards and rabies cases have significantly risen. I don't pity them. We need less govt and more people willing to accept responsibility for theirselves.

I wouldn't take rights away from the trapper anymore than I would take the right for the granola muncher to use public lands. Just want people to accept responsibility for theirself and their pet, or their working dog. The right to use it is just as much mine as theirs.

Private land is a completely different thing in my opinion. I pay my dues to own it, and I'm the king of my domain! I will assert that with whatever means necessary.



Pops2 said:


> because that style of trap infringes on other peoples right to use PUBLIC land (because even granola munchers & their dogs have a right to access PUBLIC land even during trapping season). i'm a huge defender of trapping but using any kill trap in a way that doesn't exclude freeroaming dogs is just stupid & a good way to get ALL trapping banned.


----------



## snake35 (Jan 24, 2011)

To funny. I guess that you let people do whatever they want on your property . The bear hunters are not turning their bear dogs loose and then the dogs chasing bears on to posted land. They are turning them loose on the road where the land on both sides are posted. In both instances where I shot the dogs the hunters were armed. 

I own 159 acres and lease another 3500 acres. I think that gives me the right not to have idiots and their mutts off my property.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

There is no excuse for using dog killer traps on public lands because we have plenty of alternatives that are at least as good if not better than 220's.

It is impossible to hunt grouse without allowing the dog to range out of sight and many times out of hearing.

My dog was killed within 50 yards of my vehicle. We had been to that area 3 times before it happened and I had been looking for vehicle tracks to see if anyone had been in the area checking traps. She just lucked out the first 3 times with the wind in the right direction. It could have just as easily happened to someone taking a walk.

330's set on land are illegal and that hasn't had any impact on trappers or made other traps legal. There is no justification for trappers to continue to use these dog killing traps when other alternatives are readily available. In the end it WILL hurt trapping.

If more CO trappers had LJ's attitude it's no wonder trapping has been banned. I wonder how many dogs had died before people became fed up.


----------



## snake35 (Jan 24, 2011)

I do not advocate setting connibears on public land. Have not used public land since I lived in Idaho.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

Why don't you quit blaming me and others fishead? You apparently knew the area was heavily trapped, yet you let your dog out without it being at your heel. Whether it was 50 yards or 200.

You were setting fox traps, not hunting grouse. Yeppers... you can do both, but not at the same time. A simple leash, or more training would have prevented the outcome. It's like blaming gun owners for gun deaths, or car owners for accidents. Traps of whatever kind, are a much used means of furbearer population control.

When one is set, you are trying to appeal to an animals instinct, and unfortunately your dog was the first on the scene. If it was a snare you found your dog had died in, your reaction would probably be the same?

To go out and seek other trappers sets, to destroy, speaks of you.

For the record. I lobbied hard against the amendment, and I'd never used body grip traps on land. Just can see the effectiveness of using them on certain species. I'm more about personal responsibilities and respect towards my fellow man who struggles to make an honest living.

Dogs are gonna be lost to legholds and snares as well, due to feet freezing, or asphyxia. Your still gonna be mad at the outcome, whether on public or private land!



fishhead said:


> There is no excuse for using dog killer traps on public lands because we have plenty of alternatives that are at least as good if not better than 220's.
> 
> It is impossible to hunt grouse without allowing the dog to range out of sight and many times out of hearing.
> 
> ...


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

The area isn't heavily trapped. I don't know of any place in this area that is heavily trapped. That is what makes it all so dangerous.

No one is blaming you but your attitude that there should be no restrictions even when safe alternatives are available is why trapping is losing ground.

I've caught some of my dogs and a few others in footholds and none had any injuries.

I'll repeat. There is NO reason why trappers are allowed to set dog killing traps on public lands when safe alternatives exist.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Fish, I'm sorry about your dog.

I think the ultimate irony is that many trappers felt forced to go with the body gripping conibears due to the bunny huggers protests against leg hold traps.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

I used to trap and this has always been an issue. I'm with littlejoe on this one for the most part. But what if my neighbor decides to set a trap in a **** run right between our properties knowing full well he'll catch my dog? I hate restrictions but in the case of Conibears on dry land there has to be some resonable restrictions. Just to many people moving into the country here in the east. And it's not making it eaiser for the trapper. It was the main reason I gave up fox trapping. Too many dog catches. And that was before the big push into the country, back in the 70's to be exact. I don't know what the future holds for trapping. But just looking at the population shifts and the destruction and fragmenting of habitat, it's not good for wildlife or anyone who enjoys trapping or hunting for that matter. I don't have a practical solution to the problem, but I do have a bunch of 220's for sale.:gaptooth:


----------



## Graham (Jul 24, 2011)

fishhead, I am sorry for your loss. I'm also sorry this thread went in the direction it did. Seems to me we should be focusing on how we can prevent accidents like this, rather than throwing blame at each other. 
I agree that connibears should not be used on land, and definitely not on public land. I agree that people should always have control of their dogs but accidents do happen and knowing what to do in that type of situation might help. This guy has a good piece of advice http://www.terrierman.com/traprelease.htm although I would be inclined to keep the laces on the traps permanently.
I get really worried when hunters, trappers and landowners, which most of us are on here, start bitching at each other. Don't forget this is a public forum that the granola munchers can read and use against us. 
Again, fishead I am truly sorry for your loss. Like you said, he was your best friend. Not a good thing to lose.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

The biggest problem is the unpredictability of running into one of these landmines. Our county has over 100,000 acres of public land and 250 miles of forest trails. It is impossible to predict where a dog might encounter a 220. I avoided every area that I've found evidence of 220's but it didn't help. Trapping season runs from mid-Oct to early January. That completely overlaps grouse season. There is absolutely no way to prevent a bird dog from getting caught so the only other option is to work towards a ban on ground setting 220's.

But the bottom line is that there are suitable alternatives to planting these landmines where dogs might find them.

We got 1/2" of snow today so this afternoon I went looking for 220's. I found one a couple hundred yards off a logging trail. That might seem like it's safe but I visited this very area a few years ago with a different dog. The trap is set illegally and I left a phone message for a local CO. Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to lead him to the illegal trap. The trapper has at least one other set in the area so I will track it down too. Even if he had set it legally without the illegal additions it is still in a spot that could needlessly kill a dog.

Nothing I can do will bring back my precious Penni but I will do everything I can to protect my future dog and the dogs of other hunters.

For the record I continue to support the use of footholds and snares. With the new improvements like center point anchoring (base plates), multiple swivels, shock absorbing springs, and offset/laminated jaws I believe we can safely set on public land and not worry about hurting someones pet. Combine that with public education I think we can continue trapping for a long time.


----------



## acde (Jul 25, 2011)

Sorry for your loss.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Thank you. This has been extremely difficult. Yesterday was my birthday but there was no reason to celebrate.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

setting ANY kill trap on land is the equivalent of shooting your guns off on new years or independance day. you CANNOT absolutely control what gets caught. i know of rabbit beaglers that have had dogs killed in 120s. OTH i don't know of anyone that has ever caught a dog in a connibear water set. footholds & even regular snares have a FAR lower incidence of mortality period. footholds in the hands of a good knowledgable trapper are at least as effective as kill traps. but most important of all, if you catch my dog or some granola muncher's dog (yes some of them do go outdoors in winter) in a foot hold or snare, I can open the foothold or the snare & free them. unless i am RIGHT THERE, the dog will be dead before i can get there to free it from a connibear. not to mention a lot of people lack the knowledge or strength to open the larger kill traps.
now little joe is going to say well the dog should be under control & at your side. well by your definition of under control ALL dogs in the field would be banned because EVERY use for a dog in the field requires the dog get more than 10 feet from the owner/handler at some point, even retrieving. 
this attitude, of i should be able to do my thing however i want and all other outdoor users can kiss my behind, is the SOLE reason ANY outdoor activity gets banned out right. hunters, trappers & fishermen FAR outnumber nonconsumptive outdoorsmen. heck we even outnumber the politically active misguided urbanites that will NEVER set foot on the lands they would ban us from hunting & trapping on. hunters are the second largest constituency of outdoorsmen after fishermen. houndsmen & trappers are two of the MOST visible minorities of the outdoors population. they are also the two minorities the majority of outdoor enthusiasts are willing to throw under the bus. an unwillingness to make reasonable changes to how we do business is the SUREST way of alienating possible political allies. it isn't just trappers that need to think about these things. houndsmen need to police there own and help run the selfish disrespectful nimrods out of the sport. in the east they also need to really take a hard look at the fact that citiots are moving to the country & cutting up the properties and they need to switch to dogs more apropriate to that environment. so by no means am i saying that everyone should cater to dog hunters.
what i'm saying, Little joe, is you're wrong headed & in no way is your attitude conducive to retaining any outdoors rights.


----------



## littlejoe (Jan 17, 2007)

Mr pops2,
I've certainly been wrong at times before, and I surely be wrong again. You're entitled to your opinion the same as me.

I wasn't trying to belittle fisheads dog loss, but rights lost, are almost impossible to regain. Like I said I had never used bodygrips on land, but can definately see where they would fit in a trappers repertoire, and some occasions would be a better alternative to leg holds. Never would I use on where a dog catch was likely. YES, everyone involved in outdoor activities needs to educate theirselves and know thier responsibilities, and for sure the trapper. Yes, there are some irresponsible trappers, same as anything else. Why punish those who arent?

Nothing is going to be perfect. THese people out for a walk with their pooch that is caught by any means will probably have the same reaction. And they will support any anti trapping legislation they can. And it won't just be for public lands!!! 

No, I'm not a houndman. I've had stockdogs all my life and they've been with me over lots of time and miles.THey worked to as far as few hundred yards away, but I knew where they were at and what they were doing. They were in control. If you've got a dog out there and not in control, your risks of losing it are much greater, regardless of the means the end was met. If I had happened to lose one to a body grip, I would look at it as an accident, and wouldn't seek to destroy anothers sets, or get them banned.

I'm done with this thread.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Tonight I got a call from a guy who's dog died in a 220 on Monday. It was a pointing dog with a collar that beeps when the dog stops. He immediately went to the dog but he still couldn't save it.

When he reported it the CO told him that 13 dogs have died in 220's this fall. I don't know the specifics such as whether that was statewide reporting or not but I do know that many dogs just disappear leaving the owner to lie awake at night wondering if they are still alive.

Last night I guided a CO to an illegally set 220. Hopefully the CO can ticket him for other illegally set 220's too.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

This was in todays paper. Hopefully we can get the law changed because obviously all the talk about responsible trapping is just empty talk. It's evident in the comment from the super trapper from Breezy Point.

http://brainerddispatch.com/outdoors/2011-12-30/traps-can-pose-threat-hunting-dogs


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Thank you. I'm sure that many of the dogs that disappear each fall have died in killer traps and were tossed into the brush.

This is an issue that affects anyone with a dog that goes for walks in the woods or even lives near public land. My intention is to get these traps off the ground where they can't kill any more dogs. Other trappers in other states do it so MN trappers can too.


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

Setting #220s on the ground is actually prohibited in parts of the state already. Look at the rules for using them in the lynx's core range, the same restriction make the traps pretty dog safe.. I think its already been proven that the changes did not disrupt trapping in the lynx zones so I don't see why the rest of the state couldn't be included. Prior to the law change hunting dogs and pets were getting caught pretty frequently in those areas as well. 

Sorry to hear about your dog.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I think most of the trappers in that areas already set killer traps in trees anyway since they are mostly after marten and fisher.

I've seen those restrictions they placed on ground set 220's in the lynx zone and don't believe they would have stopped our dogs from dying.

A friend sent me this link. http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/80121777.html

It happened just a few miles north of here 2 years ago. That's 5 dead dogs in just this area and I really didn't make any effort to find them. The DNR furbearers specialists said he only had 7 recorded cases since 2007 statewide. He admits that he really has no idea how many dogs have been killed but I'm sure it's probably in the hundreds statewide over the past 20 years.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Hey Fishhead, I read the article in the Strib today that mentioned you. Looks like your efforts are gaining some traction!


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

tinknal said:


> Hey Fishhead, I read the article in the Strib today that mentioned you. Looks like your efforts are gaining some traction!


Here is the article from yesterday's Star Tribune: http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/138013713.html

And, Fishhead's story will also be told on WCCO-TV news at 10PM tonight!


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

Cabin Fever said:


> ...And, Fishhead's story will also be told on WCCO-TV news at 10PM tonight!


http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2012/01/26/minnesota-man-says-dnr-hidden-traps-are-killing-pets/

Good job, Fishhead. Your tenacity and dedication to a cause are very admirable traits and an honor to Penni's memory.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Thank you. And thanks for the link. There are lots and lots of other people carrying the load too.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Sorry for your loss, BTDT... it's like a wide open arterial wound, bleeding out your soul, and there's no tourniquet around to stop the loss... no way to make it 'go away'... just like the old saying, all bleeding eventually stops (usually when someone dies, unfortunately), in a couple months, the pain will dissipate, but not the feelings.

As far as the petition, remember, to the average person, they're not going to differentiate between good trapping and bad trapping... to them, trapping is a brutal bloody (insert emotional terms here) outdated notion (they don't realize they're supporting it, by buying furs). If they're going to sign a petition, they might want to go whole hog and just ban all trapping.

I have trapped, and was disgusted when I was successful. I trapped only to eliminate problem animals. I'm thinking the online petition might not gain much sympathy, if you relate how you lost your best friend to a trap.... while trapping yourself. Might want to leave that part out.

Just last saturday, I was showing some Montana friends my place, and a dozen or so of my dogs followed us. On the far side of my place, they all started baying something... of course, I forgot to take a firearm, and I'm thinking a wild hog... got over there, and the neighbors had caught one of their own anatolians in a leg hold snare. Called the cousin, she came out and removed it... the dog didn't move much, and the skin wasn't hurt.

Sure you know what went wrong in the whole scenario, and how you could have prevented it... I know the couple of times "I" screwed up, and it cost a life, that I went back and 'Monday Morning Quarterbacked" it over and over and over.

You can mess with me all you want, you can mess with my stuff, mess with my head.... I'll survive... But go messin' with my dog, and we got a fresh can of whoop a>? getting opened. Hope you can work it out with your trapper (former) friend.


----------



## Our Little Farm (Apr 26, 2010)

fishhead said:


> This happened on public land.
> 
> We should not be allowing people to plant landmines on public land and that is EXACTLY what 220's are.


Totally agree.

So sorry for your loss.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Now it seems that some trappers are accusing me of things I haven't done and of knowing things I didn't know. I suspect some of that might be coming from the trapper I turned in for illegally using an electronic bird in his killer trap box.

I expect I will get an "interview" from the DNR if they take those guys seriously.

There's a trapper on HT feeding them information. Knock yourself out. I've got nothing to hide and my intentions are clear. Get all body grips placed off the ground or underwater. If our dogs weren't getting killed this would not be necessary. An exception might be 120's placed in wooden boxes with 4" openings and the trap recessed.


----------

