Eland, the best way to kill a lion is with dogs, at least in the Rockies. And I'll say that hunting them is a blast...

That being said, I tend to agree with others here though, and would suggest that one lion on your lease is not worth getting too worked up about. If you want to kill him, fine. Another one will move into his territory later. If you don't kill him, it won't be the end of the world, and you will still have good hunting. I bet trespassers, poachers, dogs, fences, and other non-natural things kill more deer than that lion....

quote:

I think I see the logic to your position. When the wolves in your neck of the woods have wiped out the deer and elk, they will effectively wipe themselves out. Net result fewer elk thus fewer wolves.

Funny, that in the tens of thousands of years that wolves, coyotes, bears, lions, elk, deer, antelope, moose, sheep and goats have inhabited North America, predators were never responsible for wiping anything out. What kind of survival strategy is it, to decimate the very thing that keeps you alive?

LJS, I wouldn't put much faith in the garbage you read about predator/prey relationships. I guess someone from PA who has no real field savy living with wolves or lions could easily have misconceptions about how things work 1500 miles away in another part of the country.

MG

quote:

Originally posted by Skinner.:

quote:

hate to bust your bubble but, yes, they are OUR deer.

I don't mind bursting your bubble by pointing out that wildlife is a publically owned resource regardless of your personal feelings.

If during deer season one of 'your' bucks hops the fence to an adjoining property and is shot by someone else you have no legal recourse bacause the law doesn't recognize your 'ownership'.

True, but in Texas if you "happen" to hop someone's fence in pursuit of "our deer" and are shot by the landowner in the process, the law won't recognise your right to chase the "collective's" deer on his property. That is why we tend to call them "our deer"; because as long as they are on our land we have certain rights similar to ownership of the animal.

Eland slayer, cats have a nominal 30 day cycle wherein they traverse their territory in a big circle about every thirty days (unless denned- up with cubs but that is seasonal). If you can time the next kill closely you should be able to learn the cycle and know the week to be in the field with dogs to solve the problem.

The last problem cat we had was tamed by a Peterbuilt two weeks later in the next county.

5/20: "Why not let him clean out the herd a little bit? Get rid of the old, sick, weak, dying, etc., deer?"

5/21 "I, for one have never stated that predators take only the weak, or sick.."

based on a number of responses, sounds like several people might see a contradiction in your two posts.

"I guess someone from PA who as no real field savy living with wolves or lions could easily have misconceptions about how things work 1500 miles away in another part of the country"

It's almost 1000 mi from "The Mountains of Wyoming" to Mason, TX...sounds like "another part of the country" to me...

465H&H,

To answer your question: In 1999, TPWD came out and did a deer population census on the ranch. The number they came up with was 569 deer. That was over 6 years ago and since then, they've never taken more than 50 does and 20 bucks in a year. According to the landowner and TPWD, the population has grown considerably. That is how we come up with a population estimate of 600-700 deer.

quote:

5/20: "Why not let him clean out the herd a little bit? Get rid of the old, sick, weak, dying, etc., deer?"

Where is the world "only" in that sentence? Did I actually STATE that lions ONLY take hte sick, weak, dying, etc???

quote:

5/21 "I, for one have never stated that predators take only the weak, or sick.."

Keep on twisting words olarmy....Texas is already the biggest joke in the states for their "twist" on wildlife management. Tell me, when was the last time you saw a wild wolf, lion, or bear for that matter? Your Texas petting zoo's don't count either...

MG

quote:

Originally posted by MAC:
What an ego!!!!!!!!!! "We don't want him killing all our deer".

Son, you don't own any deer. Nobody does unless they are in a secure pen. The lion is doing what comes natural to him. If he takes a buck instead of an old doe, well that's just nature. A lion is not going to have any appeciative impact on a well managed deer herd. A lot of the major ranches in Texas, and elsewhere, have killed off all the predators and artificially increased the numbers of deer by feeding and now have to do culling operations to keep the herds balanced. Nature has let the good old predator/prey thing go on for millions of years and it seems to work pretty good. The mountain lions in this country have been feeding on deer for a hell of a lot longer than we hunters have.

Having the lion there will make your deer herd stronger in the long run. Natural predadation is an important part of the wild world. By wanting to run out and kill the lion for doing what nature intended it to do so you can have "your" deer is one of the biggest reasons the anti's have a problem with hunting.

Now mind you, I'm not against hunting the lion. My family has hunted and killed many of them over the years. I just think they should be hunted in the proper mind set. They are an incredible animal and should be hunted with reverence, not just because they take some deer off a place that is "loaded with deer". The lion could care less how much you and your family have invested.

Lions hunt to fill their stomach. I'd like to see you try to eat the antlers off the dead buck you found. You hunt for enjoyment. If you didn't, you wouldn't care about the dead 4 1/2 year old buck, you'd care about the loss of meat and I don't see any mention of that.

The lion hunts to survive and feed it's young. Big difference! My 2 cents worth.

Mac

One of the most intelligent posts here.

quote:

Where is the world "only" in that sentence? Did I actually STATE that lions ONLY take hte sick, weak, dying, etc???

No need to get all worked up. I NEVER said the word ONLY was in the sentence...only pointed out that a number of folks seems to disagree. And it's also clear that miscommunicating or misunderstanding a communication on the internet is easy to do. To me, disagreeing is not a crime..and if you don't happen to agree with me, it doesn't automatically mean that you are "stupid". Reasonable people can differ...


Also tried to point out that a person from PA is just about as close (geographically) to the issue as hand as a person from WY. But you seemed to think he is too far away to have a credible opinion....don't understand that logic.

olarmy,
I think the only real problem Madgoat has is that he wishes he lived in Texas.

In this case I don't think it matters where someone is from... Lions in Texas do the same thing as lions in Wyoming. They eat deer. We have more lions here than anyone knows what to do with, but we are not running out of deer.

While this has nothing to do with Eland's Texas lion problem, it's funny how people in Wyoming blame predators (wolves, lions, griz) for the decline in big game numbers. Yet, nobody seems to give a shit about the oil and gas industry here, and it's effects on wildlife. For those of you who are not familiar with this, just do a google on the "Jonah Field", or "Powder River Basin" and look at the photos. I live in the middle of the Powder River Basin, and to be honest I'd rather have a shitload of lions and bears here than the gas/oil development. I think the deer would too....

No difference between this and cattle ranching. Nobody wants predators killing their cattle. No Texas rancher/hunter/leaseholder/etc. wants a predator killing their wildlife either.

Texas landowners, or anyone who benefits financially from the wildlife, will view predators in a similar light. Whether it is a coyote or mountain Lion.

They can potentially take money out of your pocket by killing the animals that you depend on for your income.

I doubt Eland Slayer wants all Mountain Lions dead. I am sure he probably would like the Lion to move on down the road and leave his deer alone though.

I can't blame him.

Eland Slayer, good luck. I hope you get a crack at this cat. It will make a nice trophy. If not, I hope he moves on down the road, maybe spread his killin' out a bit!

Just don't send him North.

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
olarmy,
I think the only real problem Madgoat has is that he wishes he lived in Texas.

Why would I want to do something stupid like that???

quote:

No difference between this and cattle ranching.

Kind if a sad day, if we have gotten to this point with wildlife.



MG

Eland Slayer, don't let 'em get you down !! It's your lease to manage, and you are managing the deer herd. Part of that is managing the feed, water and cover. And part of it is managing the mortality through traffic, predators and disease. Yours to manage, not the lions !!

Hire a predator control guy and turn him loose.

And mountain lions in Texas are far from short supply - I recall hearing in Jeff Davis County they kill something like 300 a year without making a dent in the population. The Hill Country doesnt have that kind of population, of course, nor could it stand to and still have the livestock and game that make it special.

Good luck, and keep an eye out that you don't overpopulate the deer either. Lots of science already exists on that score, and I can't add anything meaningful to it, other than to say don't be afraid of trial and error.

quote:

Originally posted by Madgoat:

quote:

No difference between this and cattle ranching.

Kind if a sad day, if we have gotten to this point with wildlife.



MG

How can this be sad? How can it be a bad thing that we have placed wildlife at the top of the list and shifted management practices from cattle production to wildlife management?

"If it pays, it stays."

When wildlife becomes financially more beneficial than cattle (which is the case in a lot of Texas) the ranches will shift their focus from strictly cattle production, to:

a. Cattle ranching with wildlife as a supplement.

b. Wildlife production/management with cattle as a supplement.

or ..

c. Wildlife production/management with no cattle.

It is happening here. Guys who used to run cattle are finding out that the Deer that have been here all along are a better cash crop than the cattle.

As a rancher, you are going to pay attention to this and manage the wildlife to your benefit.

The only negative I see (and I am sure this is probably what you are talking about) is that it is getting more and more expensive to hunt.

Well, unfortunately, that is going to happen. But I would rather see the price of huting increase than the quality of wildlife decrease.

Like it or not, wildlife is a commodity.

Personally, I would rather see an alfalfa field full of deer rather than cows.

But that is just me.

ElandSlayer:

Just let the DRSS come and do a Mt. Lion hunt on your property! We'll hunt that boy for free!

ElandSlayer1

If you want to hunt the lion and it is legal go for it. It will end up being a more remembered trophy for you than 99% of the deer you shoot on your lease. You might try doing a lot of walking to try to locate a fresh lion kill. The lion will probably return for additional feeds from the carcass. Find out which direction the lion went from the kill(probably towards water). Then find a place to sit and watch the carcass for a shot when it returns. There are a few hunters here in Idaho that have used this technique to take cats. Usually done here in the winter when deer and cats are on the deer winter range. A low siccess method but one worthy of a true hunt.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
Thank you Lhook7.

Mac

I guess we can agree to disagree. I hate to bust your bubble but, yes, they are OUR deer. I'm sure if you ask some of the other proud Texans on this board, most will agree that these deer are OURS. If they live on your property and you spend thousands feeding them and caring for them, they are YOURS. We feed 1 1/2 tons of supplemental feed per week. We would not be doing this if they weren't OURS.

This mindset is the major thing that is wrong with much of hunting in Texas. BY LAW, all wildlife belong to the State and by extension every person in the State. THEY ARE NOT YOURS. You can not pen them up and, legally, sell them. If one of them get's off your property and onto one that somebody else hunts - then that somebody else has just as much right to hunt that animal as you do. Maybe one day the TP&WD will stop brown-nosing all the big landowners and get right with proper wildlife managment.

BTW, the biggest, non-enforced law on the books is the one that states that you can not build a fence that impedes the natural movement of wildlife. Just because it's not enforced, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means that politicians like money and big friends than doing what is right by The People.

Also, BTW, I'm not an anti-hunter (as evidenced by many of my previous posts - see the turkey on this post); I'm anti-dumb@ss, anti-moron. You sir, and like-minded, will be the death nell for hunting as we once knew it in this country.

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
Madgoat,

we plan on taking 150-200 does this year to thin out the population.

quote:

they've never taken more than 50 does and 20 bucks in a year.

Good luck with that, it turns into work when your herd is that far out of whack. Even a lion that eats one deer a week would only get 52. That leaves you with 100-150 to kill. Have you or any group you've been associated with ever, ever killed that many deer in a season. And you've not even started killing bucks yet.

You's get better result from your "management" schemes by spending time cullling does and hogs than by chasing cats and/or coyotes. BTW, deer are browsers not grazers, so all the grass in the world does little to help your deer herd.

quote:

BTW, the biggest, non-enforced law on the books is the one that states that you can not build a fence that impedes the natural movement of wildlife

Relander: Interesting!Never heard of such a law. Did a quick search and was not able to find it. Would you be able to provide more info on where the law could be found? Thanks...

Me too. Not saying it isn't true, just wonder, for curiosity sake.

I'm also unfamiliar with any law in Texas restricting fencing in any way. I'd love to find that in writing for many reasons.

As to thinning a herd, my best weekend helping out a rancher friend was 12. That's a hellofalotta work in one weekend! You have an insane amount of work in front of you...add the pigs and you might want to invest in a front loader for digging mass graves.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:

quote:

BTW, the biggest, non-enforced law on the books is the one that states that you can not build a fence that impedes the natural movement of wildlife

Relander: Interesting!Never heard of such a law. Did a quick search and was not able to find it. Would you be able to provide more info on where the law could be found? Thanks...

Well, on this point I guess I'm beginning to show my age a bit. Below is the code. See that the portion concerning fences was amended in 1997 - prior to that it was against the Texas code to build a fence such that it prevented the free movement of wildlife. Again, politicians bowing to the monied interest in disregard to the People at large.

§ 1.011. PROPERTY OF THE STATE. (a) All wild animals,
fur-bearing animals, wild birds, and wild fowl inside the borders
of this state are the property of the people of this state.
(b) All fish and other aquatic animal life contained in the
freshwater rivers, creeks, and streams and in lakes or sloughs
subject to overflow from rivers or other streams within the borders
of this state are the property of the people of this state.
(c) All the beds and bottoms and the products of the beds and
bottoms of the public rivers, bayous, lagoons, creeks, lakes, bays,
and inlets in this state and of that part of the Gulf of Mexico
within the jurisdiction of this state are the property of this
state. The state may permit the use of the waters and bottoms and
the taking of the products of the bottoms and waters.
(d) The Parks and Wildlife Department shall regulate the
taking and conservation of fish, oysters, shrimp, crabs, turtles,
terrapins, mussels, lobsters, and all other kinds and forms of
marine life, or sand, gravel, marl, mud shell, and all other kinds
of shell in accordance with the authority vested in it by this code.

Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1405, ch. 545, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.


§ 1.012. PUBLIC FRESH WATER. Any public freshwater lake,
river, creek, or bayou in this state contained in any survey of
private land may not be sold but shall remain open to the public.
The Parks and Wildlife Department is authorized to protect the fish
in public waters under rules as it may prescribe.

Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1405, ch. 545, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.
Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1256, § 1, eff. Sept. 1,
1997.


§ 1.013. FENCES. This code does not prohibit or restrict
the owner or occupant of land from constructing or maintaining a
fence of any height on the land owned or occupied, and an owner or
occupant who constructs such a fence is not liable for the
restriction of the movement of wild animals by the fence. The
existence of a fence does not affect the status of wild animals as
property of the people of this state.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1256, § 123, eff. Sept. 1,
1997.

Redlander: thanks for the citation. I'd prefer to think of the '97 law as being written to protect private property rights. But I guess on that issue, we'll just have to agree to disagree...

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
Redlander: thanks for the citation. I'd prefer to think of the '97 law as being written to protect private property rights. But I guess on that issue, we'll just have to agree to disagree...

It was designed to permit what was already happening - fencing in, and tacit sale, of public wildlife. Prior to that, you would have been obligated to trap out the deer and then restock with deer that were bought. Under the "new" conditions, if a deer gets fenced in, its his/her tough luck and the landowner is no longer liable.

BTW, I don't even know if Eland Slayer's ranch is high fenced or not. This was just an aside to the main topic of "the only goood predator is a dead predator".

Redlander,

No, our lease is not high fenced.

Eland Slayer you have a PM

quote:

Originally posted by Wendell Reich:

How can this be sad? How can it be a bad thing that we have placed wildlife at the top of the list and shifted management practices from cattle production to wildlife management?

"If it pays, it stays."

When wildlife becomes financially more beneficial than cattle (which is the case in a lot of Texas) the ranches will shift their focus from strictly cattle production, to:

a. Cattle ranching with wildlife as a supplement.

b. Wildlife production/management with cattle as a supplement.

or ..

c. Wildlife production/management with no cattle.

It is happening here. Guys who used to run cattle are finding out that the Deer that have been here all along are a better cash crop than the cattle.

As a rancher, you are going to pay attention to this and manage the wildlife to your benefit.

The only negative I see (and I am sure this is probably what you are talking about) is that it is getting more and more expensive to hunt.

Well, unfortunately, that is going to happen. But I would rather see the price of huting increase than the quality of wildlife decrease.

Like it or not, wildlife is a commodity.

Personally, I would rather see an alfalfa field full of deer rather than cows.

But that is just me.

In terms of where we are headed as stewards of our country's fish and wildlife:

Using the above commerce conceived model of "Extreme Predator Control" to artificially facilitate "Maximum Sustained Yield" of ungulates (in this case whitetail deer) for the purpose of commerce in wildlife; I say that is not good for the future and health of deer herds in the wild and is not good for the future of hunting in general.

After America declared independence, our Supreme Court ruled that the wild animals in this country that once belonged to the king now belonged to all the people equally. We now have the opportunity and privilege to hunt by virtue of our citizenship.

Though we have lost some animals forever due to poor stewardship by some of our ancestors, the animals we hunt today are the results of conservation efforts of recreational hunters who stopped the market hunting and commerce in wildlife from our past. Many of these early developed and time proven restoration and conservation methods continue to this day.

We have a responsibility to future generations to see to the conservation of wildlife. To keep our opportunity to hunt, we must remember that wildlife belongs to all the people. The future of hunting depends upon how the majority of people view hunters. The majority of people today are not hunters.

Drs. William B. Davis and David J. Schmidly had over 70 years of experience studying this predator-prey issue in the State of Texas. They have published numerous books on the topic and their work is published and used by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. They have found that the high percentage of lion predation on deer in Texas is beneficial from a long term game management view in most instances because the mountain lion tends to prevent overpopulation of deer, which is currently the bane of the game manager in the areas of Texas where this cat has been exterminated.

Turning wildlife deer management into the production model such as used by cattle ranchers and fish farmers is motivated by short term commercial and political goals at the cost of the long term health and well being of our wildlife itself. Extreme predator control and artificially supporting an overpopulated herd for the purpose of market hunting and commerce goes against our ethic as a nation today in regards to our wildlife. Killing any lion for the fear that it may take a trophy deer off your lease vs a sick deer and eliminating a natural predator so you can personally select which deer you cull off your artificially overpopulated herd goes way beyond what is ethical in my book. And in the end, what becomes of these man made artificially out of balanced herds of predator and prey animals after the commercial incentive is gone? What happens when there is no one to dump tons of feed to support overpopulated deer herds that are now spreading disease?

We are all in this together and this is something that we need to get right. As I said before, this is not just Texas and is not just lions. It is certainly not and should not be driven by what is most profitable. It should be driven by what is the most balanced, well thought out and reasonable way we can conserve habitat, wildlife and our tradition of hunting.

You're forgetting Gary, that Wendell is a wildlife pimp, selling off critters to the highest bidder.

He doesn't give a shit about anything you stated (which I agree with) unless he is turning a buck.

"If it pays, it stays?" That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard! It is logic like this that is doing the anti's work for free.

MG

You have to put out all that feed and you call it "hunting"??? That's the most perverse and abhorrent thing I can imagine. Hunting is about getting out and enjoying nature and that cat is part of nature. I'm not against hunting cats but to hunt them because they are going to take some of "your deer" is wrong. There are plenty of cats and wolves around here--there are also lots and lots of big game animals. Like the indians say "the wolf kills the deer but wolf keeps the deer strong" You have to have some give and take to enjoy and maintain a wilderness experience.

the chef

Boy, there sure are a lot of experts out there who want to tell you how to manage your hunting lease in a way they'll approve of. Right down to the fencing law that doesn't exist.

Guess you better listen closely so you can gain their approval. Otherwise they might think their opinions aren't driving other people's actions. Especially those Texans who field more hunters and harvest far more deer each year than any other state. Guess we've been going about this all wrong. Sure am sorry.

Sheesh !

quote:

Originally posted by H T:
Boy, there sure are a lot of experts out there who want to tell you how to manage your hunting lease in a way they'll approve of. ...

Hey HT, Smells a lot like Ultra-Leftist Radical-Liberal DEMOCRAT PETA fools. Always trying to impose "their thoughts" on everyone as if they are somehow morally superior.

They offer no sane supportive argument about "why" their way is best, because their foolishness falls apart when discussed with "logic" thrown in. But they want to tell everyone if it isn't done "their way" then all other ways are wrong.

They sure have a lot to learn.
---

Concerning hunting, as long as the Method is legal - I'm for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Madgoat:
You're forgetting Gary, that Wendell is a wildlife pimp, selling off critters to the highest bidder.
MG

Wow MG! It is like you have known me all my life. Here is a closeup of my business card photo.

Now thats FUNNY! I need some bling like that to wear when I pick up hunters in Mexico!

Drum

Whatever Drum!

Let the truth be told.

Here is a photo of me and Drum Daddy (as he is known in the wildlife pimp circles) at our last hunt.

GaryVA,

Wow, an actual, well thought out reply to a complex question. Your views are interesting and intelligent!. A pleasant surprise. We agree on a lot of things, almost everything you say has merit, however, somehow we come to different conclusions.

There are some false assumptions in your thinking as well as some of the others.

Reading your post, there are so many things you say that I agree with. (despite what certain Goats think) but here are some that are just plain incorrect. (these are broad generalizations, yes, any fool or goat even, could find examples to prove these generalizations wrong.)

1. The overall message you post is that ranchers " ...dump tons of feed to support overpopulated deer herds ... " That is not really the case with a managed piece of property. Yes, ES has this problem, but he has a plan to fix it. Ranchers typically do not feed protein to support an artificially high deer population. We feed protein to maximize the health and well being of the animals. A deer manager knows his carrying capacity and does his best to maintain it.

I have a nutritionist visit the ranch. We walk around and survey the browsing at the end of the winter to see if there is any sign of overpopulation.

Yes, some ranches, like the one ES is on are overpopulated. He wants to bring the population back to a reasonable level, but he does not want it done indiscriminately. He has a plan to take xxx does and xx bucks off the ranch. He would rather the Lion not determine who goes and stays. (no sense in killing button bucks and yearling bucks when the goal is to reduce the number of does.)

2. Gary, you said " ... Turning wildlife deer management into the production model such as used by cattle ranchers and fish farmers is motivated by short term commercial and political goals at the cost of the long term health and well being of our wildlife itself. ... "

I am sorry sir, but you couldn't be any more wrong.

My wildlife management goals (and most concerned landowners goals) are sustained utilization. Taking off a percentage of animals that will not effect the overall size/age structure/buck:doe ratio of the herd, unless that is the goal! (i.e.. reduce number of does to have a healthy buck:doe ratio or reduce number of deer to carrying capacity.)

Remember, the concerned manager/landowner wants the land to consistently produce. I do not care if he is growing cotton, wheat, cows or deer. If he has any sense in his head, he will not allow the deer population to suffer for short term gain. Sure it happens, but not with someone who properly manages his herd.

Gary, you said " ...Though we have lost some animals forever due to poor stewardship by some of our ancestors, the animals we hunt today are the results of conservation efforts of recreational hunters who stopped the market hunting and commerce in wildlife from our past. ...

I certainly hope you are not comparing the game rancher to the market hunters who had no concern for the future of wildlife.

It is in the deer managers best interest to maintain a healthy balance of deer numbers and a healthy buck:doe ratio. An unhealthy balance (too many deer, to many does per buck) will result in decreased quality of the offspring and overall decreased quality of the herd. This is what ES is trying to do, take more does, and take (hopefully) mature bucks.

The USA is a huge wildlife farm. The State and Federal governments manage the wildlife like an enormous ranch. Telling us how many ducks we can take, or how many Elk can be taken from unit X in so-and-so state. If the waterfowl populations increase, the Fed says, "Shoot more Geese". The Western states dictate how many licenses are available for deer or Elk or Moose or Sheep.

The only difference between the government doing this and a concerned private landowner is that the landowner is far more concerned about the numbers and will manage it better.

Now some people and even some goats have a problem with a landowner turning a profit. There is no reply that can satisfy them. Their rational is socialism at it's finest.

Thanks Wendell, I couldn't have said it better myself.

As Wendell said, we plan on "fixing" this place. Like I said earlier, this is the first year for us to have the place, so it's not our fault the population and buck:doe ratio is out of whack. Starting this year, we are only taking bucks that are at least 5 1/2 years old (not counting cull bucks). It will be tough to do, but we will hopefully take 150-200 does this season. Thank God for MLD permits, because I'll probably end up shooting 30-40 does myself this year. The does that we can't use, we will donate to the local orphanage and Hunters for the Hungry. We are also letting some of the kids from the orphanage come out and do a hunt for does.

Just as Wendell said, even though the lion will help reduce the overall deer population, he will do it indiscriminately. Regardless of what a few of you here on AR think (I won't mention any names of those people or goats), human beings ARE more intelligent than Mountain Lions. We are also part of nature and the food chain. We are able to do a much better job of deer management than the lion. The lion has no concept of age structure, buck:doe ratios, or even overall population like we do. So, think before you speak when you're talking about the balance in mother nature, because we are also part of mother nature.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
5/20: "Why not let him clean out the herd a little bit? Get rid of the old, sick, weak, dying, etc., deer?"

5/21 "I, for one have never stated that predators take only the weak, or sick.."

based on a number of responses, sounds like several people might see a contradiction in your two posts.

"I guess someone from PA who as no real field savy living with wolves or lions could easily have misconceptions about how things work 1500 miles away in another part of the country"

It's almost 1000 mi from "The Mountains of Wyoming" to Mason, TX...sounds like "another part of the country" to me...

In the unlikely event that anyone here will concede the following point:
That Cat behavior is cat behavior and that mountain lions don't behave materially differently than domestic cats except in choosing the size of their prey proportional to their own size...

That years ago someone told me about a trick to rid my tomato patch of slugs (little shell-less snails) put little shallow plates (pie tins work) with any cheap beer... the slugs can't resist the smell, crawl in and drown.
Then come the robins... who eat the slugs and thereby get rather drunk...

Anyone here ever seen a drunken robin try to fly? it's amusing to say the least....

Well three different cats were all greatly amused too.... you'd think a cat would take advantage of a "crippled" robin that couldn't get away, but though three different cats would watch intently mabey even sniff at the bizarre
behavior of these birds...

The cat seemingly saying, "this is f'ed up I'm not sure whats wrong here, but I'm pretty sure I don't want to catch whatever it's got by eating it..."

I suspect big cats react the same way to an obviously sick deer...

I know from observation of the relatively rare cougars here in PA that cougars tend to specifically target large male deer because apparrently the cats realize they don't have to kill as often if they kill bigger deer.
so well over half the cougar kills are bucks in their prime.... I really doubt that cougars behave any differently elsewhere.

Yeah, I'm 1500 miles away too, but common sense knows no boundies or limitations from distance.

AllanD

quote:

Originally posted by Madgoat:
You're forgetting Gary, that Wendell is a wildlife pimp, selling off critters to the highest bidder.

He doesn't give a shit about anything you stated (which I agree with) unless he is turning a buck.

"If it pays, it stays?" That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard! It is logic like this that is doing the anti's work for free.

MG

It never ceases to amaze me when a "hunter" is willing to jump in bed with the anti-hunters because he disagrees with the way way someone else hunts or manages game.

There have been a lot of posts on this thread about the "death knell" of hunting. I believe that when "hunters" are willing to side with PETA that will be the death of hunting.

Hey Mr. Reich, Now you did it, confused the entire PETA mob with Facts and Logic.

I'll predict the only thing they have to offer is Vulgarity and foolishness.
---

Best of luck with "managing" your Game.