BigGameHoundsmen.com

A little advice to whomever shows up on the Abbott show to defend Utah houndsmen and talk issues regarding cougars predation and lion population densities. First off take a short course in staying on topic and second off don't give rebuttals by calling the other side names which only shows that you don't have the answers, debate the issues and don't get into running down other groups or you will have already shown the listening public what an uneducated, redneck group of guys we all are...........people who only care about ourselves and little little if any regard for wildlife or others!!!

best of luck!

Pot calling the kettle black

Sackett wrote:Predators have the greatest impact on the prey species and habitat and the elements come in second place.......

Um not sure I can quite buy that, it's a little more complicated. A common alternative theory is that predator species will mirror prey species moreso than predator species impacting prey species.

The general gist is that predator species will have greater litter size/concentration when there is a readily available food supply. When that food supply goes away, those predators will too. This is a very common occurrence for us when it comes to bobcats. They seem to follow the rabbits around in our area the most. I've seen them kill all sorts of stuff (grouse, deer, etc) but you usually will find cats if you can find rabbits.

The time when predators have a greater impact on prey species is when the prey population has spiked and the predator population has responded, then the prey species starts to dwindle. That is when predators will hit a prey species hard and not let them rebound.

Much of this depends on the type of prey species. Wild feline species don't have large litter sizes so it takes much longer for their population to grow and impact a prey species. Now canines are much different, their population can grow much quicker than cat species because their litter sizes tend to be higher. Normally mortality can be high in canines in the wild, but if they have a great food supply it can also be very low.

We all like to think we've got the answers on this stuff, but there are so many variables at play it's hard to pin down. The one thing we can control is our own actions. Just because the state issues a tag, doesn't need it means to be punched. No matter what the species.

Nolte hit it on the head! I'm sure Utah's dwindling deer herds have been blamed (at least partially) on the lion, but most likely, the lack of lions can be blamed on the dwindling deer herds.

Habitat habitat habitat . That is THE Biggest factor in any game population .

Nolte wrote: Um not sure I can quite buy that, it's a little more complicated. A common alternative theory is that predator species will mirror prey species moreso than predator species impacting prey species.

First off Nolte, there aren't many blanket statements a person can use that applies across the board on predation. In Utah, however, mountain lions have multiple prey species and can and did switch from one to the other. Our deer herds started downhill in the late 80s and early 90s, and most of those lions just switched over from mule deer to elk and never missed a step. We have elk in about every winter or summer deer range and they frequent the same habitats side by side. A eighty pound bitch can slam dunk a calf or cow elk without any trouble, and they can drag it off as well. A good friend of mine ran hounds and watched as that switch took place and many of the tom lions were/are found traveling from elk herd to elk herd in Utah.

Nolte wrote:The general gist is that predator species will have greater litter size/concentration when there is a readily available food supply. When that food supply goes away, those predators will too.

More commonly with predators they tend to have the same size litters but end up killing them for food if need be. After the caribou herd crashed in Denali National Park (from 20,000 to 1,000 animals) the grizzly bear population did the same. They had a study going back in 1995 and had written a paper on it in the Park Newspaper. It seems the average age griz was seventeen years of age an the bear population as a whole had very few young, so they collared 17 cubs in den. By fall only three or four had survived and biology data tells us they were most likely eaten by their own kind, but the bears didn't quit having cubs they just quit raising them............

Nolte wrote:We all like to think we've got the answers on this stuff, but there are so many variables at play it's hard to pin down. The one thing we can control is our own actions. Just because the state issues a tag, doesn't need it means to be punched. No matter what the species.

I'll buy into the theory that none of us has it all figured out, and that includes the study people. And you are also correct about the killing, as I have had one elk tag in the past fifteen years and Zero deer tags in the same time period; furthermore, I have not hung any of my tags on a bitch lion.

Sackett wrote: After the caribou herd crashed in Denali National Park (from 20,000 to 1,000 animals) the grizzly bear population did the same.

So the prey species collapsed and the predator species followed suit. Seems to support my theory.

I may be wrong about having smaller litter size with reduced food, but what it the difference if cub/kit mortality is reduced because the litter size starts off smaller or the parents killing them. The result is the same, less young making it to adulthood.

I know for certain that deer will have less fawns when food is scarce. I think the doe may actually absorb the fawn if times are real lean. In wolf country you will see many less does with 2 or 3 fawns than you will in farm country without wolves. I don't know if it's from not having them or being predated upon, but again the result is the same.

For prey species of any kind deer, elk, pheasants, ducks, turkey, whatever you need habitat for them to thrive. If predator species have a spot to rear their young, they can get by on mariginal habitat if it's got some sort of prey species for them. They'll adapt.

I've got no doubts that lions can/will take down elk. In my only lion hunt, we saw several times where they made them groceries. My point was that it's probably not the lions that are the nemesis of the deer herd in Utah, even though they are an easy target because they prey on them.

Nolte wrote:I've got no doubts that lions can/will take down elk. In my only lion hunt, we saw several times where they made them groceries. My point was that it's probably not the lions that are the nemesis of the deer herd in Utah, even though they are an easy target because they prey on them.

If you go back and read where this predation thing all started you'll that Ike didn't blame the mountain lion for the lose of a deer herd, nor did he managers either. What he said in that post over on UKC was coyotes have the greatest impact on mule deer, they have little or no value to hunters and DWR couldn't sell a tag if they wanted to, therefore we should focus our attention on removing as many of them as possible.

http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.ph ... did=413327

I think different things can affect any given area. Some areas in Utah are affected by the lose of habitat, others may have a huge coyote problem. Still an area can be affected by large deer numbers being killed on hiways.

The areas I hunt have seen some big wild fires years ago. The winter range is in excellent shape, but still no deer. The major factor I see is coyotes and the lack of fawn survival because of them.

Now some food for thought. In 1980 there was between 10,000 and 13,000 elk in this state. Now there over 60,000 elk with a goal of over 68,000. Some research that has been done indicates that deer and elk are not as compatible as previously thought. I know they try to keep the elk off of the Henrie Mountains, and Arizona has liberal permits on the Kiabab.

Not trying to start a fight on that topic just want people to think about it.

Sackett I am planning on being on the radio talk show. 1st I'm a houndsman, a redneck, a mule rider, and a hick from the sticks. I will try my hardest not to embarrass the hounding community

LIONHOUND1963 wrote:The areas I hunt have seen some big wild fires years ago. The winter range is in excellent shape, but still no deer. The major factor I see is coyotes and the lack of fawn survival because of them.

Sackett I am planning on being on the radio talk show. 1st I'm a houndsman, a redneck, a mule rider, and a hick from the sticks. I will try my hardest not to embarrass the hounding community

Coyotes can have nine or ten pups a year and need to do plenty of killing to feed them.

I realize that elk numbers are high or pretty good but thank God we have them or those lions would surely have starved out. I still don't believe that the elk do as great as damage to the range as all those sheep and cows did back in the 50s and 60s.

Good luck on that talk show Lionhound1963, and my comments about rednecks was not a slam against anybody I was just making a point to bplott that his audience will most likely be deer hunters or the public at large, and calling people names isn't going to win him any debates...............

LIONHOUND1963 wrote:
The areas I hunt have seen some big wild fires years ago. The winter range is in excellent shape, but still no deer. The major factor I see is coyotes and the lack of fawn survival because of them.

Not trying to start a fight on that topic just want people to think about it.

Samething here, big fire (100,000 acres), excellent winter range, but no deer. Yet for the last 30 yrs, I have hiked the upper edge of the aspen zone during the first part of July. This is when we usually (90% of the time), get a freak snow. sleet, hail storm up there. The fawns are only a few weeks old then. I bet that by now, I could have 1/2 fulled the back of a pickup with the tiny hooves that are left over from the kills. Everytime, the hooves are all that is left. They are so small and out of place, that I doubt the average person ever sees them, let alone a biologist. The bears here do tremendous young deer/elk predation as well, that is until the domestic sheep hit the summer range. Then the bears have easy pickings on mutton until October. I read a study from Oregon on bears and 85% of the total elk calf mortality in that state was due to bear depredation. Yep, coyotes, bears and poachers on the winter ranges...it is all there for everyone to see, but not many want to admit it.