JoseCuervo
New member
FCB,
You add so very much to these topics....
You add so very much to these topics....
Antihunters set to win!
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
FAIRCHASEBEN
New member
Thanks EG ,
I try to add a little humor when I can .
I try to add a little humor when I can .
JoseCuervo
New member
And you do are effective, as you add little humour.
Tom
New member
Beef is in the top 8 sources here
http://www.sixpacknow.com/proteinsources.html
Wild hogs would be real high, it looks like, ham is number 3.
http://www.sixpacknow.com/proteinsources.html
Wild hogs would be real high, it looks like, ham is number 3.
Tom
New member
Hey, we need more trapping in New Mexico, not less. A trapper there told me today we are loosing though. Many more anti letters and e-mails.
They are going to draw only on deer now. A ban on trapping there is really bad stuff for hunting and in general. Please write ASAP asking for support to continue public land trapping, not ban it.
They are going to draw only on deer now. A ban on trapping there is really bad stuff for hunting and in general. Please write ASAP asking for support to continue public land trapping, not ban it.
JoseCuervo
New member
Tom,
Did you tell the New Mexico Trapper that I at least sent a letter, supporting his rights to trap and shoot livestock on public lands???
Did you tell the New Mexico Trapper that I at least sent a letter, supporting his rights to trap and shoot livestock on public lands???
Tom
New member
No, I didn't tell him that. Its seemed counter productive. The deer population is in trouble. I don't think the elk is, but haven't figured that out. The cattle would complement the deer, plus, they have programs to get them out of the wilderness. We need to be trapping predators every year there, lots of them. They are eating the hell out of fawns, plus, its a majore tradition, plus, its a way to manage the predator population, plus, its a way to save people's pets from being eaten. Stuff like that, we need trapping for a lot of reasons there.
Tom
New member
Here's a note from the trapper today.
"My job is on the line as well as the future of hunting and ranching. Just today on the Angel Ranch I recieved a call about 2 calves being killed by coyotes,thats $900.00 down the tube. I set traps and yes it is BLM lands. This is simply stupid, a few special interests groups albeit well funded can cause so much grief to so many people who are doing nothing but minding there own buisness and not bothering anybody."
These antis are ruining the future of hunting and ranching by banning trapping. We need lots of letters ASAP to ask the New Mexico game commission to continue support of public land trapping for predator population control.
"My job is on the line as well as the future of hunting and ranching. Just today on the Angel Ranch I recieved a call about 2 calves being killed by coyotes,thats $900.00 down the tube. I set traps and yes it is BLM lands. This is simply stupid, a few special interests groups albeit well funded can cause so much grief to so many people who are doing nothing but minding there own buisness and not bothering anybody."
These antis are ruining the future of hunting and ranching by banning trapping. We need lots of letters ASAP to ask the New Mexico game commission to continue support of public land trapping for predator population control.
Tom
New member
Somebody at Greaybeards trapping forum went to the meeting yesterday. We need more out of state letters to counter the antis.
"Just under 1000 letters supporting trapping had been received to date as compared to just over 600 against trapping. Of those supporting trapping well over 90% came from residents of NM. Non residents made up a significantly larger portion of the opposition (sorry, but from my angle I couldn’t get the exact numbers). The department’s presenter added the caveat that these numbers where changing daily. "
Write ASAP.
"Just under 1000 letters supporting trapping had been received to date as compared to just over 600 against trapping. Of those supporting trapping well over 90% came from residents of NM. Non residents made up a significantly larger portion of the opposition (sorry, but from my angle I couldn’t get the exact numbers). The department’s presenter added the caveat that these numbers where changing daily. "
Write ASAP.
Tom, do you have any numbers regarding how many coyotes, etc, trappers take every year in NM? Is it enough to control the predator population? Does trapping make a difference in the survival rate of mule deer in any hunting unit? What kind of predation rates do coyotes have on deer fawns down there?
I'm not in support of the trapping ban, I just still think you're taking the wrong approach, unless you can answer those questions above. Here's some info on coyote control and fawn survival. **LINK** It's a piece out of a larger study that was done in CO, that can be found **HERE** . These are the kinds of things I would be using if I were on the anti's side and you used the "protect the deer herds" argument. I think you need to find a different angle. I could be wrong, too.
Oak
I'm not in support of the trapping ban, I just still think you're taking the wrong approach, unless you can answer those questions above. Here's some info on coyote control and fawn survival. **LINK** It's a piece out of a larger study that was done in CO, that can be found **HERE** . These are the kinds of things I would be using if I were on the anti's side and you used the "protect the deer herds" argument. I think you need to find a different angle. I could be wrong, too.
Oak
Tom
New member
The reference web site:
http://texnat.tamu.edu/symposia/RoleofPredatorControl/008.pdf
p56-57. "New Mexico. Temple(1982) summarized deer mortality research in New Mexico conducted during 1976 through 1981. ... and 55% of mortality was due to predation. Deaths were attributed to coyotes (37.5%), mountain lions (25%), dogs (12.5%), unknown predators (12.5%), felids (6.3%) and unknown canids (6.3%). Of ... fawns ..., 72% died within an average of 25 days following birth. Predation accounted for 90% of mortalities. Causes of death were attributed to coyotes (35%), unknown canids (31%), unknown predators (23%), mountain lions (8%), and bears (4%)."
"Temple, L. 1982. Mule deer research. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Federal Aid Project, New Mexico W-124-R-5/Job 2. Final Report. Sante Fe, New Mexico."
was posted above, 35% of fawns were eaten by coyotes in New Mexico in that study summary.
If you don't write and ask that they continue to support trapping, then the anti proposal to ban trapping would succeed. If you want, ask them to not do the ban until they answer all your questions. I wish I had time to answer all your questions for you. If you want to sit by and let them ban trapping by doing nothing, that's your choice.
http://texnat.tamu.edu/symposia/RoleofPredatorControl/008.pdf
p56-57. "New Mexico. Temple(1982) summarized deer mortality research in New Mexico conducted during 1976 through 1981. ... and 55% of mortality was due to predation. Deaths were attributed to coyotes (37.5%), mountain lions (25%), dogs (12.5%), unknown predators (12.5%), felids (6.3%) and unknown canids (6.3%). Of ... fawns ..., 72% died within an average of 25 days following birth. Predation accounted for 90% of mortalities. Causes of death were attributed to coyotes (35%), unknown canids (31%), unknown predators (23%), mountain lions (8%), and bears (4%)."
"Temple, L. 1982. Mule deer research. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Federal Aid Project, New Mexico W-124-R-5/Job 2. Final Report. Sante Fe, New Mexico."
was posted above, 35% of fawns were eaten by coyotes in New Mexico in that study summary.
If you don't write and ask that they continue to support trapping, then the anti proposal to ban trapping would succeed. If you want, ask them to not do the ban until they answer all your questions. I wish I had time to answer all your questions for you. If you want to sit by and let them ban trapping by doing nothing, that's your choice.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I dont think theres much credible data to support trapping simply because of fawn survival or to protect livestock.
The letter I wrote had more to do with proper wildlife management, the economics of trapping, and the value in recreational trapping.
I personally couldnt care less if some fawns are killed by coyotes or if some livestock gets chewed up. Goes with the territory.
The letter I wrote had more to do with proper wildlife management, the economics of trapping, and the value in recreational trapping.
I personally couldnt care less if some fawns are killed by coyotes or if some livestock gets chewed up. Goes with the territory.
Tom
New member
That's a good set of points to make!
Here's a statement with the reference for a study in Arizona where they already banned trapping. It clearly shows importance of predator control for fawn survival in drought conditions. The question remains, how much is needed in practice, if you really want to increase deer herd size.
"During 2002—which was the driest year in Arizona’s recorded history —the fawn-to-doe ratios within the enclosure were 100 fawns per 100 does. Outside the enclosure in Game Management Unit 22 the ratio was 18 fawns per 100 does. “The only significant difference between the two areas is the absence of predators in the 3-Bar enclosure,” Ballard says." source
http://www.azod.com/topstory/Archive/2004/Q2/Research%20shows%20predators%20can%20significantly%20impact%20deer%20during%20drought.htm
We have to control predators just like anything else, moreso in drought conditions. This study shows it is possible, but with total predator control, to raise fawn survival from 22/100 does to 100/100 does. If it raises 4-5 fold there, its clearly a factor, but that is pretty academic. There is no need to ban trapping for sure that I see, predators have to be managed just like any other animal and trapping is a long time way that we do it.
Here's a statement with the reference for a study in Arizona where they already banned trapping. It clearly shows importance of predator control for fawn survival in drought conditions. The question remains, how much is needed in practice, if you really want to increase deer herd size.
"During 2002—which was the driest year in Arizona’s recorded history —the fawn-to-doe ratios within the enclosure were 100 fawns per 100 does. Outside the enclosure in Game Management Unit 22 the ratio was 18 fawns per 100 does. “The only significant difference between the two areas is the absence of predators in the 3-Bar enclosure,” Ballard says." source
http://www.azod.com/topstory/Archive/2004/Q2/Research%20shows%20predators%20can%20significantly%20impact%20deer%20during%20drought.htm
We have to control predators just like anything else, moreso in drought conditions. This study shows it is possible, but with total predator control, to raise fawn survival from 22/100 does to 100/100 does. If it raises 4-5 fold there, its clearly a factor, but that is pretty academic. There is no need to ban trapping for sure that I see, predators have to be managed just like any other animal and trapping is a long time way that we do it.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Tom,
The article you posted was really vague on the vegetative differences inside and outside the enclosure. That sends up a warning sign to me.
Also, the reasons for predation were not mentioned??? Perhaps a lack of hiding cover for fawns?
I'd like to get some more specific info on that report.
Also, I dont think that low fawn survival in a drought situation is at all unnatural, and I also dont view it as a reason to kill more predators. Every first year biology student knows that predators/prey relationships are cyclic, in particular in drought, heavy snow years, etc.
I still find no good reason to kill predators based on this study. All this study does is reprove the point that animal populations respond to environmental conditions.
The article you posted was really vague on the vegetative differences inside and outside the enclosure. That sends up a warning sign to me.
Also, the reasons for predation were not mentioned??? Perhaps a lack of hiding cover for fawns?
I'd like to get some more specific info on that report.
Also, I dont think that low fawn survival in a drought situation is at all unnatural, and I also dont view it as a reason to kill more predators. Every first year biology student knows that predators/prey relationships are cyclic, in particular in drought, heavy snow years, etc.
I still find no good reason to kill predators based on this study. All this study does is reprove the point that animal populations respond to environmental conditions.
FAIRCHASEBEN
New member
Buzz ,
I'm conducting my own predator control experiment here , basically I'll be ground checking every yippe-ci I see for the next ten years or so , kinda un-scientific , but I'll let you know how it turns out .
I'm conducting my own predator control experiment here , basically I'll be ground checking every yippe-ci I see for the next ten years or so , kinda un-scientific , but I'll let you know how it turns out .
Tom
New member
Warren Ballard of Texas Tech is quoted there as wanting to find all factors that cotributed to that huge predator effect. His dept. number is
Dr. Ernest B. Fish
Range, Wildlife, and Fisheries Management
Professor & Chair
[email protected]
(806) 742-2841
He would be a good one to ask, but I just found his dept. info., he's in that dept. headed by Fish, they'll have his e-mail. by the pattern it should be [email protected] ? It would be neat to get the whole writeup.
Dr. Ernest B. Fish
Range, Wildlife, and Fisheries Management
Professor & Chair
[email protected]
(806) 742-2841
He would be a good one to ask, but I just found his dept. info., he's in that dept. headed by Fish, they'll have his e-mail. by the pattern it should be [email protected] ? It would be neat to get the whole writeup.
Calif. Hunter
Active member
From what I have seen and heard from locals, the last few years, the mule deer population in NM sucks. For what reason, I do not know.
That's the point I was trying to make. Much better argument there, rather than predation of deer. Tom, I was playing devil's advocate with you. I didn't mean to imply that I didn't send a letter.
I think NM's recent decision regarding management of mule deer on private property will have a bigger negative impact than coyote predation. See this topic: **LINK**
The pertinent info: "The [NM game] commission also has approved a proposal to allow ranchers in limited deer-hunting regions to have as much deer hunting on their land as they wish."
FWIW, the commission got a letter from me regarding this as well.
Oak
BuzzH
Well-known member
FCB,
Good deal, have fun.
Coyotes are a challenge, for sure.
Are you planning on putting up any fur...or are you just the typical hack with a rifle?
Trapping/predator hunting rocks!
Christmas break while in college...
Four days of coyote/fox hunting pays off...
Good deal, have fun.
Coyotes are a challenge, for sure.
Are you planning on putting up any fur...or are you just the typical hack with a rifle?
Trapping/predator hunting rocks!
Christmas break while in college...
Four days of coyote/fox hunting pays off...
M
Mr. Foreman
Guest
Sorry Tom! I got in on this late; but, will write anyway. Might be a good idea tofollow this pretty close.
Similar threads
