Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
in reply to: Great Coues Hunts #28312
Nice photo of the young buck, sounds like too much fun!
in reply to: 300 Tuffhead testimony #25414Sounds like a great hunt Jans!
in reply to: resolution #25021Corpsman- I assume you are at camp pendleton, right? If so, then the closest public land you can hunt is Cleveland National Forest. There is great opportunity for spot and stalk style. I hunted down there for 3 years. It was a ton of fun because I could usually find deer and try to stalk them even though the deer always won. I hunt on the ground, most modern archers use tree stands, so during the archery seasons I had hundreds of thousands of acres to myself cause there is nowhere to hang a stand! Have fun and watch out for rattlesnakes (never been bit but usually stepped next to a 1/2 dozen each season).
I’m reading a paper titled “persistence hunting by modern hunter-gatherers” by Liebenberg, and he compares meat yield of different hunting methods: with dogs, persistence (running down an animal), poison bow and arrow, spear and club. For the calculation he uses a 50% animal weight meat yield. So for say a 400 pound elk he would say there is 200 pounds of meat. That percentage comes from the work of Lee and observations of San bushman communities. And I was wondering why they calculate such a high meat yield compared to what seems to be a consensus here that 1/3 is our meat yield…? All I can think of is the bushmen eat more of the animal than I do: they cook the head and eat all meat from it, every edible organ (including testicles and brain), I’ve seen videos of them roasting hooves, splitting bones to get all the marrow, and even in the case of large animals like giraffes they eat the skin. A neat and different perspective, I thought.
in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #56112Here’s the link (or URL so you can copy and paste it) to an article about a cougar eating a wolf. Kind of a neat story, though probably unusual.
in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #55520donthomas wrote: I appreciate the info about PLOS and have no reason to doubt them. It’s still odd that the abstract didn’t include the details of the original publication, as is standard in scientific literature. John LeCarre’s great fictional British intelligence agent John Smiley was fond of saying, “Informtation is no more valuable than its source.” And that was BEFORE the Internet. Don
I may misunderstand what you’re getting at, Don, but this article was first published in PlosOne; it is the original article. There is no print version, the online form is the publication. I’ve never read a medical journal or article, maybe its different, but I never see the name of a journal in an abstract in wildlife publications (somewhere on the page it will mention the journal, or you have the print version and already know what journal you are reading).
Interesting idea Forager. I could see it working well in specific cases and not in others. While I was working in Alberta, the provincial game agency was tired of getting complaints from ranchers in this one valley so they came in with a helicopter and wiped the pack out. That could be a case where they could’ve allowed hunters to do it (maybe not from the helicopter though). A depredating cat in the suburbs of southern CA would be a different scenario though.
in reply to: Deer are Pests?! #55508Thanks Forager. I understand they are trying to find solutions to the situation, but I think its a dangerous slope to take- allowing the sale of wild game. As the article stated we already allow the sale [and privatized harvest] of lumber; and look at where that has gotten us: monocultures and stands that are managed on 60 year rotations. Now we think of a redwood forest as being old at 100, seriously? Urban folks are already out of touch with nature and I think this would only muddy the water more. I am not in favor.
in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #54927Yeah Don, PlosOne is an online journal that is FREE to access for everybody, thereby allowing other folks and not just academics learn from high quality research. It is definitely peer reviewed and has high standards.
in reply to: Deer are Pests?! #54915Hey Forager where did you hear The Wildlife Society is in favor of market hunting? That position really surprises me and I did a quick google search but didn’t turn up any info. I’d really be interested in reading about that if you could point me in the right direction.
in reply to: Bear spray videos #54498Yesterday I was out in our first snow with two other guys who still had bear tags. We followed the trail of a big sow for 2 hours until we caught up to her. We were standing on a stee hillside in some really thick tanoak and next to a stump. The uphill side of the stump was eye level with me. As we were scanning above us, the sow got up out of her bed from underneath the stump close enough to touch her with my short walking stick! It was all too quick and unexpected and so close that noone had or could take a shot. But it sure was exhilarating. I had bear spray but didn’t even have time to think about it. She turned and melted through the brush away from us.
in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #53733loneviking wrote: I disagree about non-hunting not causing problems.
The one thing I take away from the article is that ‘indiscriminate’ hunting doesn’t work to stop a problem. It has to be targeted at specific problem animals. What I really wonder though, is if in a place like California where they aren’t hunted, if even targeted hunting would reduce the problem?
Loneviking, This is my main point in most predator hunting conversations. When people go on a lion hunt, they drive up into the mountains away from towns to shoot a cat. Usually, problems animals are around the towns, and sometimes on rural ranches. Folks aren’t going there to hunt cats. Those animals just get removed (aka killed) by Wildlife Services.
What could happen, is if you kept the wild-mountainous population really low (through liberal hunting quotas and killing females), then maybe less cats would wander down towards town and make their home there. This is just hypothetical, I don’t know if it would work or not. I’m just trying to see the other side.
I don’t oppose predator hunting, but I don’t think it should be how we fix the problem of “nuisance” animals. Its our behavior we need to change and our outlook about predators.
As to how we get science into wildlife management, well here in CA its the voting public and politicians and special interest groups that have passed some of our most controversial game laws, the state agency has no say at that point, science or not.
in reply to: How long before your first harvest? #52554Shreffler,
It was in my 4th year of hunting that I first harvested a big game animal with traditional tackle. 1st year, rifle hunting, no meat. 2nd year, killed my first deer with a rifle, 3rd year only traditional hunting, no meat. 4th year killed a yearling blacktail buck from 5 feet with my selfbow. Last year, didn’t have a shot at legal deer, but had does, fawns and spikebucks within 15 yards and at one point 2 yards away. This year, no shot at deer either. Already thinking about scouting for next season!
in reply to: Good news for hunting #50409I especially like the last two sentences. Definitely good to have more ethical hunters.
in reply to: Arrow Integrity #50398Ed,
Which of these scenarios would be better in your opinion:
1) Shooting a regular carbon arrow (by regular I mean any of the usual carbon shafts sold at a bow shop), with an external footing, an EFOC around 29%, and parallel shaft.
2) Shooting a carbon shaft that is the toughest shaft available, no footing (internal of external), an EFOC around 24%, and tapered shaft.
Basically what I’m getting at is, I’d like to be sure I have a strong arrow. But strength will come at a cost in weight. Even though the Grizzly Stiks are tapered, I still think I’m going to lose a little FOC cause of the heavier shafts.
in reply to: Meat care and cooking #49455Forager wrote: One of the easiest to use ways we’ve found to keep stock is to use ice cube trays. Each cube is two tablespoons and there are 16 cubes per tray (2 cups). Freeze the cubes, then store in Ziploc bags in the pre-measured 2 tablespoon cubes.
That’s a great idea on how to store the stock instead of baggies or old containers.
-
AuthorPosts
