Fishnhunt New Zealands main hunting and Fishing Forum. millions of posts on fishing and hunting, dogs, 4x4 vehicles, outdoors and much more Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 Send TopicPrint
Normal Topic PCR150 vs DoC150 (Read 3683 times)
Tom Dhu
Just Joined

New Zealand's Hunting
and Fishing Forum

Posts: 2
Location: London
Joined: Jul 15th, 2019
Gender: Male
PCR150 vs DoC150
Jul 19th, 2019 at 2:47am
Print Post  
Anyone got any views on the relevant merits of these two.

They do look to be virtually identical and one would guess they are very similar in terms of performance, but does this extend to actual performance in the wild?
Back to top
IP Logged
Donor Member

I love salmon fishin

Posts: 3657
Location: Darfield
Joined: Feb 19th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: PCR150 vs DoC150
Reply #1 - Jul 19th, 2019 at 12:31pm
Print Post  

I am still using 20 plus year old DOC200s.. i bet you wouldnt be using the "knock offs" anywhere near that.
Back to top
IP Logged
Forum Font

I Love The FishNhunt Forum

Posts: 1511
Location: Christchurch
Joined: Oct 25th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: PCR150 vs DoC150
Reply #2 - Jul 20th, 2019 at 11:06pm
Print Post  
Because the copies were being produced by different companies there was no guarantee they would perform to the same standard as the original.

"The trigger needs to be set to the right weight. An animal could get halfway out [before setting the trap off] and die a slow death," he said.

"They are selling thousands of these and conservation groups will think they are buying a cheaper alternative."

He believed the copies were damaging the reputation of the DOC 200. He had encountered the "frustrating" situation of people who had been using the copies telling him the DOC 200s were ineffective.

Waddington stressed that he made "not a cent" from the DOC 200 traps as he had "gifted the design to the people of New Zealand".

Landcare Research science team leader Bruce Warburton confirmed neither the PCR nor the Combined Industries traps had gone through the NAWAC test. But the PCR trap had undergone mechanical testing, which found it delivered a similar performance to the DOC 200.

The test noted the Conservation Department traps had a more sensitive trigger.

Pest Control Research managing director Malcolm Thomas said he understood Waddingtons concerns for the reputation of the DOC 200.

He was satisfied with the findings of the test and was confident the PCR traps were of a similar standard to the DOC 200, which made them a valuable conservation tool.

Conservation Department technical advisor Darren Peters said they had no issue with the traps being copied, but because the "plagiarised" traps did not meet NAWAC guidelines, the department could not endorse their use on conservation land.

The DOC 200 design was not patented as it was hoped others would copy and improve the traps, with NAWAC endorsement.

Th Conservation Department was aware the two companies highlighted by Waddington had used referenced it in marketing for the copied traps.

Letters were sent to the companies in 2016 asking them to stop. The companies did not directly respond to the letters, but one did remove the word "DOC" from the label on their trap.

Hope the above clarifies your concerns? The power in getting a patent on your design even though the DOC 200 was 'gifted'. The China market is great at doing this but comes down to quality control.
Back to top
IP Logged
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send TopicPrint

FishnHunt - New Zealands Famous Hunting and Fishing Forum Since 1995 » Powered by YaBB 2.6.11!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2021. All Rights Reserved.
Site Design By Alan Simmons - PRism and all rights are reserved from 1995 and onwards