Much Like in Real Estate, the First Rule in Trapping is LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION!

Photos courtesy of the author.

Many people are familiar with the saying that pertains to the real estate business: “The First Rule in real estate is Location, Location, Location!” That same axiom might be properly applied to trapping, as well. Although it might seem trite, the ability of a trapper to select the best location to make a set…and the discriminatory sense to recognize when a site is not advantageous…might well be the most important factor in determining success. In this article, we will look at some elements that help trappers decide where to make a set and how those decisions can change with changing circumstances.

Since the premise of the article is that location is paramount to trapping success, I surveyed several experienced trappers to get their thoughts on the subject. The idea that set location is at the top of the priority list in set-making was unanimous among these trappers. For example, Kraig Kaatz, an Illinois trapper who served several terms as the President of the National Trappers Association, stated that he believes set location to be #1 on his priority list. He says, “Setting traps just to get them out of the truck is rarely productive. I can’t catch what isn’t there, whether it be on land or in water.”

Ryan Ruhl is the current President and long-time Board member of the Illinois Trappers Association. He agrees that location is his #1 set-making priority and echoes Kaatz’ thoughts, stating that the first part of deciding location is whether or not the animal is there. As he related, “If the animals are not there, there is no need to set a trap.”

Dean Corgiat, a lifelong trapper, long-time Board member of the Illinois Trappers Association and former wildlife biologist, breaks the subject down into “general” and “specific” set location criteria. He relates that general set locations are based on animal behaviors (where one would expect an animal to look for food, where an animal might bed down, etc.), while he bases more specific set locations on finding animal sign (tracks, scat, toilet areas, slides, etc.), as this means the animal has actually been there and will likely be there again. A common theme among these trappers is that location is paramount and that finding specific animal sign dictates set location as much as any factor.

Determining Location

Saying that location is important to trappers may seem like an overly simplistic statement. However, there are more complexities as to how trappers decide what site is the one they want to set. For example, factors such as ease of access to a site, relative ability to conceal a set, as well as consistent animal sign from the target species, among many others, can play key roles in deciding on set location. Kaatz relates that access to a specific set location can be very important to him; if it is difficult to get to a set to make it or check it, that location may not be the best choice, even if animal sign may suggest otherwise.

According to Kaatz, “I have to be confident that there is activity by my target species. Just because it looks good to me doesn’t mean the furbearer agrees.”

Ruhl relates that considerations such as where a set lies in location to prevailing wind direction is critical. He tends to make sets with the wind, as he can let the wind carry lure/bait scents farther to draw in target animals. As he says, “if they can’t smell it, they can’t find it.” He agrees with Kaatz that access can be crucial, especially when selecting where to make raccoon and beaver sets. As he states, “When trapping for raccoons and beavers, set access is important to me, as time is a huge player. I like to get in quick and make a few sets, then move on to the next location.”

Corgiat again makes distinctions between general and specific factors that play into his set location decision-making. He says he uses his general knowledge of an animal to decide on areas where a catch could occur. For instance, coyotes like to run edges of habitat (i.e., the edge of where one habitat type transitions into another). From that general knowledge, he can drill down into more specific factors. He explained the about coyotes and edges in more detail: “Edges can be “loud,” such as a grass field bordering an ag field, or they can be “subtle” such two adjoining grass fields mowed at different heights. Once I find my general location, I can begin looking for sign (tracks, scat, etc.) and this then determines my exact set location.” Corgiat says he has sometimes set for ease of access concerns but typically finds this less productive than setting based on positive animal sign.

Seasonal Changes

Since trapping season starts in early November in Illinois and runs through mid-February for most species, I was curious if set location decisions changed throughout the course of the season.

Kaatz highlighted changing crop field conditions as one factor he takes into account. As he stated, “crops being harvested may change animal travel patterns,” while also noting that other factors that can be seasonal, such as road construction and maintenance, can similarly affect location choice.

Ruhl also mentioned that crop changes can affect travel routes while also noted that water level changes can alter set selection. In some water set conditions, such as in a pond or lake, water levels may stay more or less stable. In those cases, a trapper may be somewhat confident that their traps can be set and not affected greatly by water level fluctuations. However, in some creeks and rivers, water levels can change drastically due to events such as storm runoff and water level manipulation via locks and dams. In those situations, trappers need to be keenly aware of changing water levels so that they can either choose a different place to make a set or even pull and re-set traps if the location will become flooded.

Corgiat highlighted several other factors that can affect set location choices as the season progresses: “Locations change throughout the season as the target animals’ habits changes, food sources change, breeding seasons come and go and colder weather affects animal behavior. With these changes, trap set locations change, as well.”

Trapping Private vs Public Lands

More than 97 percent of the land in Illinois is held in private ownership. Therefore, most trappers ply their trade on private properties. However, some trappers do take advantage of trapping programs offered on state owned-or-managed properties. As one might expect, trapping on private versus public land can greatly affect how one chooses set locations. For instance, potential locations are often restricted on public land due to interactions with other programs such as camping, hiking, hunting, etc. While this may not be the same on private properties, landowners can still impose restrictions on where (and when) traps can be set.

Ruhl states that he doesn’t trap public ground but still takes into account the ability to conceal a set, based on location. For example, he relates that a set location that can be viewed by passers-by will be made so as to be more subtle and less likely to attract attention. However, if a location is more remote and not likely to be seen, the set may be “flashier” and designed to be seen from a distance.

Kaatz states that he chooses locations, whether on public or private ground, that are the least likely to draw attention or have people happen upon them. He further states that if there appears to be a chance of his traps coming in contact with companion animals at any location, he moves on to another site.

Corgiat echoes Kaatz’s thoughts regarding companion animals, stating that he typically follows a “set on sign” mantra but will break that rule if he thinks pets or livestock might be likely to be near a set location. On public property, he says he tries to set on sign but will avoid high-traffic areas even if the set location seems otherwise perfect.

In almost all cases, trappers agree that keeping their set locations out of the public eye as much as possible is advantageous, since theft of their traps and catch is a constant concern.

Advances in Equipment

Technology has advanced over the years in trapping, much as it has done in almost all walks of life. I wondered if advances in equipment changed the ways that trappers select locations. For my own part, I can attest that the advent of ATVs/UTVs altered the site selection process my father went through on his trap lines. Though ATVs and UTVs didn’t materially change the factors Dad would consider when making a set, they absolutely allowed him to cover much more ground over a given time. This increased his efficiency and provided him with the ability to evaluate more set locations than ever before. In essence, the advent of trappers using four-wheelers on the trap line opened up a significant number of potential locations, just for the time savings these machines provided.

Ruhl pointed out that new equipment, specifically in reference to water sets, has increased his efficiency and altered his site selection process. He says he uses various new trap holders and devices for water sets that allow him to make sets faster and more subtle, thus providing more options in set location and efficacy.

Kaatz states that he tries to take advantage of every technological advance that he can, as it increases his efficiency and often makes running his trapline easier.

Corgiat states that he employs technological advances (such as changes to traps, different staking systems, etc.) but doesn’t think they really affect his set location choices all that much, concluding his thoughts with, “Nothing changes, set on sign! Technology changes but I don’t.”

Trap Locations—a Complex and Personal Decision

The entire suite of decisions that go into choosing a set location are vast and determined by many factors. Since each trapper is an individual with different goals and objectives for the various properties they trap, no two trappers will make set location choices exactly the same. Still, I hope this article has provided a basic background into the ways in which trappers make those complex decisions in the field on a set-to-set basis.

I also hope the thoughts of the experienced trappers I’ve provided demonstrate that my thesis of the paramount importance of “location, location, location” is just as true in trapping as it is in real estate.

---

Tim Kelley is a wildlife biologist for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. He is based out of the Havana Field Office and his district covers all or parts of eight counties in central and west-central Illinois.