BigGameHoundsmen.com

hello,
I am curious if anyone thinks about cougar kills with hounds, in states that do not legally allow a pursuit or kill season? I have known of a few folks that have done so, And have even had them checked in as legal harvests just because they didn't let the dogs chew em up. Do they not think of the long term effects of this. My point is that we will never get our rights back if the anti's and fish and game can prove that houndsmen aren't needed to keep populations in check. Also it continues to show hound hunters and poachers and that they kill without regard to the law. Honestly I have not always thought like this but luckilly I have grown up a bit over the years. I also would like to know why some hunters refuse to turn in poachers. I'm just curious about some more insite and thoughts. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN FIGHTING, JUST GOOD CONVERSATION.

There is a very real possibility that if you piss off the local hunters and trappers that they will shoot your dogs any chance they get. Not saying this is right, just a reality. I once saw a trapper leave a bobcat in a trap for 10 days...never turned him in cuz he new I ran that area and he'd of known who turned him in cuz I was the only other person up there. That was a long time ago and I have different thoughts now....

This is true but unfortunatly there is alot of it going around. from time to time it's not uncomon for people to steal dogs right off the tree. and there have been trappers that set traps just to catch hounds around one place i know just because a local group of guys made a big stink about trapers having to many rights. I kinda think that if both sides could get together it might make a big difference. maybe i'm wrong? but it seems that nobody wants to fight for HUNTING just for the rights of there individual sport..............just something to chew on.

Stacey, I don't want to argue either so I don't usually talk about this topic. Since we are from the same state I will tell you what I think. I don't believe we will ever get our rights back. Without the help of some wide spread outbreak in disease the lion population is going to continue to exsplode. I don't know how the deer and elk are fairing in your area but our deer and elk numbers are seriously declining. Our goverment trappers can't keep up with all the complaints we have over problem cats. And they cant kill one without a filed complaint. So where does that leave us? I was bobcat hunting yesterday after our fresh snow. I drove about 250 miles in the woods and cut 4 seperate lion tracks. ten years ago I would have cut one every two or three trips out. I don't kill lions with my hounds here in oregon we do tree them a few times per winter on accident. The penalty for killing a lion or bear in oregon over hounds is a five year suspension of your hunting rights. That is the deterent for me. There are people who get in trouble for this over here. I think they are justified in breaking the law. We have all had a right taken away from us. Yes I said a right. We are the only tool for keeping lions numbers in check. ODFW knows that lion numbers are out of control and there hands are tied just like ours are. They would love to see us useing hounds as a tool to manage the lion population. I wish I had the answer for corecting this problem. As far as swaying public opinion how can we? they think that we are cruel murderers. they put animals at the same level or value an people. That is a fundimental diffrence in how we believe. this of corse is just my opinion on a lose, lose situation.

High Desert Hounds is correct when he says the animal rights people put the same value (if not more) on the animal as they do on people. I made a trip to California about the time Prop 117 was about to be voted on, that was the bill that outlawed lion hunting by the sportsmen. In the For which supported this law, the wordage stated that the sponsors of the bill were not against the state destroying animals that needed removed but only against the sportsmen doing it.. In other words, it was OK for the state to hire a professional houndsman to kill those cats when necessary but not a hunter that might enjoy the hunt...............

I still laugh today at anybody that doesn't understand that the people the state hires to remove problem bears or lions are nothing more than one of us, and they enjoy the catch and kill just as much! The only difference in the two is the tax payers are paying for the professional to remove problem cats while the sportsmen are paying their own way to remove those same animals. Is it any wonder that the state of California ia nearly bankrupt?

Education is the key to getting voters (or the public) out in support of your sport, but how you do that is for sure a big question. Somebody once explained to me that of the voting public, the anti-hunting crowd was probably only about 10 percent while the dedicated hunters probably have about those same numbers. He went on to explain that the big voting block of people (the eighty percent) are the ones that have to be won over. Many of those people don't really care who kills those lions, but it's the spin that the antis put on the killing issue that wins over that big voting block of people. Therefore, the key to winning them back is good PR by educated people that explains what we do and why we do it.

Many of us thought it was the state wildlife agencies responsibility to educate and protect our hunting rights. However, those state agencies are there to serve those same voters that took you lion hunts away. Somehow the public has to be educated about wildlife management and the important role man plays in that system.........

Years ago I was in a RAC meeting and one of the topics on the agenda was the sage grouse. Someone had proposed doing some grouse studies in large areas, and closing down hunting on one unit and leaving the other open and compare how those activities impact the survival or population of those birds.

Well, I had been working on a sage grouse unit that had been closed to hunting by man for over twenty-five years and those birds on that unit are struggling to survive. One summer I watched a hen sage grouse that had a clutch of a dozen of more chicks lose all but two of them in the first couple months. The hawks, owls, eagles, coyotes and god knows what else prevented that population from thriving.....and not one man was legally harvesting a single bird...........

So I spoke up in the meeting and told them if they really wanted to do a meaningful study them remove all the predators off one population and not the other. They asked what I meant? And then I told them what i have just shared with you about removal of the predators that were impacting those grouse populations............some of them sucked air!

The big game manager walked over to me after the meeting and said, "I think that it is fascinating to ponder whether the public would allow us to kill eagles to save grouse."

And I responded that management was management, and if we would kill the lion or the coyote to recover our deer herds then we should do the same for the sage grouse............

roflmao!
ike

Its sad when game "managers" let public opinion sway them from what has worked and what they know is best for max numbers of hunting opertunities.

In my opinion its habitat thats most important in keeping enough animals around to hunt. But its also important to decide what types of animals are going to be in that habitat. Nature will strike a balance eventualy but is that balance going to be a huntable population? Leting lions or wolves take over an area will knock the deer, elk ect down then the preditors will die off or switch to new food ie livestock if its avaliable, then they will be killed and knocked down enough for the surviving deer, elk to make a small comeback. The cycle will repeat itself and likly there will be deer and elk as well as lion and wolves around for a long time if the habitat is there.

BUT the Huntable population of deer and elk ect will be gone or very much reduced... and the lions and wolves will be eventualy much reduced as well. I would rather see what habitat we have left managed for max numbers of game. Rather than see it see-saw from year to year due to a natural cycle. Like it or not man is here to stay and just our presence (building new houses and paving over anything we can) changes things and we realy can't go back to the wilderness before... there are too many people for that to be posible now!

well said tomjr. thinking of the future instead of the present. thanks for posting

well put,
All of you have very good points! Most of these are just my questions not my thoughts. some I simply haven't made up my mind yet. This state does have a serious lion problem, In the n.e. of the state the elk population is declineing and they are not able to take enough cougars. This is in the oregon hunter magazine, nov.-dec. issue page 16-17.

Just remember dont believe everything you read. In my opinion the population there is just about right, I hunt over there for bobcat on a normal basis and by the # of lion tracks I find I would say the population is no more out of control then over in Montana. One thing you'll find is when the deer and elk herds start decling the hunters all start pointing fingers at lions or predators in general, but seldom ever themselves. The deer and elk poulations are decreasing here as well but it dam sure isnt all because of the lions.JMO

black@tan,
Point well put, I personally haven't hunted over there but I know that you are making a good point about the pointing fingers thing. over here however the big cat populations are growing quick, I know this by seeing them from time to time with out even having dogs with me. close to my house in fact. I will not claim to be an expert on any cat but the numbers must be up when I have hunted my whole life an never seen one untill a few years ago an now find them once or twice a year.(not with dogs and in different spots not close to each other.

black & tan you are 100% percent right. preditor numberes are high here that is a fact. there are way to many lions and way to many coyotes. the biggest harm to our heards here in oregon is over hunting.with big game niumbers down and tag numbers thrue the roof what are we to do? not kill our deer and elk so there are plenty for the lions to eat? No we should reduce our lion numbers to a healthy level so there is a huntable population of all big game animals. This is where ODFW is not doing there job. tag numbers must be reduced until we can get a handle on the lion and coyote population. Thanks for bringing up a valid point that is often missed in this debate.

most populations are in trouble because of the type of harvest that goes on. oregon does not properly manage its resources. nor do the hunters. lets just take each species by species. lions. on a decline in oregon. yes decline.why? because oregon allows females to be harvested. when you shoot a high percentage of females you ultimately destroy your hunting. if your eastern oregon bobcat card has 2-3 females 2-3 toms. thank your self for helping do yourself in. as you leave private property and hunt bobcat in the national forest/ public ground you see how low the population has become. than coupled with shooting yourself in the other foot by taking the females it is just a matter of time before your hunting sucess runs out even on private land. deer and elk are also mismanaged by fish and game. allowing the huge bulls and bucks to be harvested in a given unit allows the sub-standard bucks and bulls to breed, those would have never bred nothing 25 years ago. now these bucks and bulls are what is maintaining your herds. along with urban growth and expansion, loss of natural habitat. fish and game looking more closely at tag revenue. dog hunters having to justify to the wife that they spent $1000.00 in gas only to not harvest a single bobcat to defraf the tremendous cost of hunting. so they harvested a bunch of females because they could.....don't blame the predators. its is far more mans fault......

Mike I totally agree. I have noticed a steady decline in the bobcat #'s over there. We rarely take a cat unless its a large tom, I hope the price drops out on the bobcats before they take much more of a beaten. Five years ago I could go over there and always find at least one runnable track, that's not the case anymore. Lucky to find a couple of old ones. I don't hunt my dogs to make it pay, if that was the case I would have a very large deficit each year.

blackand tanman1. you have a better grasp of what is going on in oregon than most local residents do. if some hunters keep on with the female harvest we will soon be done hunting. non resident hunting is good for the local economy. just like when i hunt in montana, i leave behind dollars in gas stations, restaurants, motels, not to mention around $350.00 in fees. i have seen enough to just want to catch and release there, as they are in the tank as well. for much of the same reasons......good luck with your oregon hunting.

I dont condone the shooting of every cat or even the taking of females never have . I learned that as a dumb kid shooting every coon and soon had none. heck as far as cats goes I could almost never even tree one. I hope that my ignorance is not held against me I haven't hunted that country in there, I read an article about that area an believed it. it wasn't ment to sound like I'm an expert. I'm not apologizing, just felt I needed to clear that up? I'm on here to learn as much as I can, not to be a self apointed know it all.