Well, I for one am tickled pink that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania gave us another set of tools to use. And I'm even more thrilled that the PA Game Commission is relaxing the two-year-old standards that they set, to allow us different cables, locks, and BAD's. Sorry that we in PENNSYLVANIA don't fit what you think is the ideal solution in ALASKA/OHIO/NEW JERSEY. Geez, we were also going to try to get mink snaring approved too but maybe we shouldn't now. From the sounds of everyone on here, maybe we should petition the PENNSYLVANIA Game Commission to abolish any forward thinking they've had and allowed to date and just do away with CABLE RESTRAINTS. Sheesh!!!

Bismouth Boy,Why does PA have to TRY to reinvent the Wheel ?
Every state around you but NY snares. It works for them.
More simply put. Snares work. Cable Restraints DONT

Alright guys, I was in a bad mood last night, so sorry for the rant. The only thing I can add to this is that all this stuff is brand-new to PA. The PA Game Commission has been watching the CR arena closely, now they have loosened up some regulations. I expect as they continue to see good trapper ethics and good relations between hunters and trappers over CR's, there will be additional loosening of the regulations. There has been quite a bit of talk about trying to get mink SNARING! legalized in PA now. Hopefully we can get raccoons as a target soon also.

Newt: You need to be careful playing with these terms. This is somewhat like "leghold" trap vs "foothold" trap, there may be a little more public appeal for a "cable restraint" than a "snare"

A cable restraint is a snare. Take Ohio for example. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we too decide to call our snares "cable restraints". We do, in fact, promote non-lethal snaring here, although we don't try to mandate it, so it wouldn't be untoward for us to call our snares "cable restraints". However, if we change the name of them, they would still work just as well as they do now. Conversely, if one of these "cable restraint" states changes the name of their device to "snare" -- well, they are not going to function a bit better.

So a statement such as: "Snares work, cable restraints don't." really doesn't hold water, no more than the statement: "Leghold traps work, foothold traps don't"

The problem arises in the legal configuration of these snares. Almost every state has some legal requirements and restrictions for how a snare can be made and applied, so we are used to that. It's not the name of the device that makes it of lesser value, it is the legal configuration.

Now, unfortunately, on top of this we have some states that actually are so "bold" (read foolish) as to incorporate both terms, snare and cable restraint, into their regulations. With each device being configured differently. What a load of crap!

-- Hal

Dusty: I've run across some unusual stuff in researching BADs and their application. One such was some snare people in Nebraska (I think). I heard they were using 125 lb BADs for coyotes. I really didn't believe it, so I sent and got some of these BADs. Sure enough, they broke out at 125 lbs. I found out later that these folks were putting the coyotes on kill poles, and the 125 lb BAD was to allow for the escape of neck-snared deer. I don't really know what the escape rate was for the coyotes, but evidently it was acceptable in that application. And I guess they were successful in releasing the neck snared deer too.

-- Hal

I just got an email regarding this, from one of the posters. As noted above PA may change some of it's regulations. So it may be not be of much value to entertain a serious discussion until we see the result of those proposals.

I will address one issue though, and one that may be a problem right now. With this last bunch of states that have come on with snaring, and in particular with "cable restraints", there have been sets of slightly varying regulations.

For me, from a business perspective, I really can't afford to stock a snare that is specific to each state. You have to go with the lowest common denominator. Right now, if I make a Wisconsin legal snare, it will also be legal in PA, MI, and MO -- and of course any state that doesn't have such stringent restrictions. (I note here that you have to install your own loop stops, but they are included with the snare.)

Actually, I could make a 325 lb BAD snare for PA right now, but that means that snare would only be good for PA, and again, I'm not willing to stock a snare that will would be specific to only one state.

To be honest, I sell a washer lock snare, a cam lock snare, a 280# breakaway cam lock snare, and a WI legal snare. I believe this covers almost every state where snares are legal.

But like I said, let's wait and see how these proposed regulation changes come around. I will however, make one prediction, if they do go to a 375 lb breakaway, it probably won't be long until they go back to something lighter. (Do these guys ever pull their heads out of their butts, and just take a look around at what other states are doing? )

-- Hal

I'm now finding out that several trappers have just received a CR survey from the PGC. Apparently on the back of the survey were the results of last year's survey in which it was indicated that 19% of all coyotes pulled out due to BADs. I think this might be part of their thinking in increasing the BAD weight.

c w hilling,
Better wait on your dicision to come up here and use Cable Restraints. The PGC is "CONSIDERING" The following regulation changes that will take effect for next year.

1. The 1X19 cable type will be legal for cable restraint use.

2. The Break-away device BAD rating will be increased to
375 lbs. or less.

3. The legal cable lenth will be increased to 7 feet from the
anchor point to the relaxing lock contacting the minimun
loop stop.

4. The language discribing relaxing locks will specify that the
lock may not be constructed of any moving parts.

Hal and Newt do you buy used cable restraints?
If not I might open my own used cables store.
I can't afford to try all these different cables, locks, BADS, etc.
I think after the new regulations come out I'll start a new thread,
"Can you build me a better Pa. Cable Restraint?" Remember that one?

Also on the survey is reported efficiency of cable restraints for fox and coyotes was 89.9 % ; whereas efficiency for coyotes alone was only 63%. I had worst luck than that. I had more catch circles than coyotes. It's probably closer to 50% mostly females.

Also noteworthy was a total of 140 BAD -related releases on animals.
63 deer, 71 coyote, 1 redfox, 2 raccoon, 1 blackbear, 1 bobcat,
and 1 fisher. ( must have been one big redfox ! and I can't believe the bobcat.)

50 animals escaped by chewing through the cable including,
39 coyote, 3 fox, 2 raccoon, 6 unknown,
10.5% of coyotes chewed through the cable to escape.
19% of coyotes straightened the BAD.

Got to run, I have to go to the hardware store and buy another
parts compartment box.

archer01

Dated for search.