Oroville, CA 1929 - His 33rd and largest cat.

Thats one big cat!

That is a nice cat. For another very large lion, try JJHack's post over at 24hourcampfire. Would you believe about 200 lbs. !! E

Looks like it might be a female.

?????????????????

LEO - Guess you thought that's the tail he's holding!

Gosh, I hope it's the tail!

Nick,

Do you have any other details about the photo or the story behind the hunt?

Regards,

Pete

Not too much, Pete - Only a dedication of sorts to the hunters' friend:

'To Lloyd Shark in memory of many strenuous but happy hours together after old Felix my largest lion of 33 to date, October 15, 1929.'Jay Bruce

Image Courtesy of:
Pioneer Museum, Oroville, Calif.

[ 01-14-2003, 15:05: Message edited by: Nickudu ]

Jay Bruce was the state of California's first paid predator hunter. He traveled all over the state and killed lions for the ranchers, etc. He supplied the orginal estimate of 600 lions for the state which was unquestioned for many years.
When the antis got hold of his estimate in the 70's, they had a field day. They claimed the state really had no idea how many lions lived in California, and had very little evidence to support their beliefs. The fact that only the lion and the deer were still on their original range didn't make any sense to them, or many others. From that day on, many studied the lion in California. The results of such "studies" often vary alot, depending on the skill, abilities and honesty of those doing the study. It's too bad. The lion has become a political football. The antis see it as a way to make the Calif. Dept of Fish & Game look bad and to smear them and the state's hunting. The fact is the state now has more lions than ever. Even in the 70's, the state's studies confirmed the presence of at least 2400 lions. But, the public, lead by the antis hysteria over a lack of "solid" evidence, convinced the voters they are endangered and to fully protect them by the 1990's. E

Eremicus,
Thank you very much for the insights!

From what I've heard if you shoot/kill a mountain lion out of necessity here in CA, and the DFG finds out, you should almost expect to be treated as "guilty until proven innocent" with regards to the legality of the kill.

I can't remember where I heard (or read?) it, but someone told me of an archer who was out bowhunting for deer here in CA. At one point he felt as though he was being watched, and turned around to see that he was being stalked by a mountain lion. The cat charged him, and he managed to get off an arrow, which went right into the cat's mouth and down into its throat. This guy went and reported the shooting to the DFG, and the wardens confiscated his bow, as I recall, while they went and investigated. The arrow lodged in the cat's throat was all the evidence they needed, apparently, and they let the guy have his bow back.

I think it might be smarter to just keep quiet about such a shooting. Even if it was in self-defense, what good could come from getting the authorities involved?