[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #48866

I don’t think a ban on hunting is responsible for negative cougar-human interactions. As suggested in the article, cougar hunting may actually increase the population because territory holding male cats are targeted when hunting. When that male is removed, younger males emigrate to fill the void. Its often these younger males that cause problems too.

I my opinion, the seemingly increase in negative cougar-human interactions results from an ever-expanding suburban-wildland interface and the shrinking of wild places where cougars can run free. Most of the cougar incidents in CA have happened outside of big cities where people hike, bike, and horse ride frequently through cougar country.

Also, I emphasize seemingly increasing incidents, because for all the 38 million people that live in CA, and one of the highest cougar populations of any state, we have a proportionately low rate of incidents. The millions of people that recreate every weekend throughout the state in cougar country and never encounter a cat is testament to how infrequently people are killed or attacked by cougars.

This article only looked at cougar incidents and legitimate hunting. Clearly, if there are no cougars, then there will be no negative interactions. So we could focus hunting on female cougars and try to eradicate cougars from a state. And that should lower the number of incidents, because there won’t be any animals. But I don’t want to live in mountains devoid of large predators and would not support that management goal.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Killed a Beautiful Bear Today! #47766

I should add the arrow broke as the animal ran past a tree.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Killed a Beautiful Bear Today! #47763

The only things about the arrow I want to change are a better footing system or a stronger carbon arrow, more FOC, and cut down my fetching to A&A. But I think the scenario would have been a lot worse if I did not have a heavy total arrow weight, tuffhead, and EFOC. I just wouldn’t have busted through this guys scapula, the bone was huge- the size of a dinner plate.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Arrow Integrity #46773

Thanks Ed. Guess I’m back to the drawing board trying to build a tougher arrow…!

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Arrow Integrity #46282

Thanks Ed, that does help. I read through updates 2007-2008, and searched “footing” on the forum here. Finding mostly information from Kingwouldbe’s posts. Let me reiterate what I think I understand to be sure I have it correct:

1) Any sort of external footing OR internal footing that is parallel simply moves the weakest place in the arrow shaft back.

2) The only footing that has increased the structural integrity of the arrow shaft is an internal-parallel-then tapering footing, with at least 3″ parallel past the insert-footing contact point

3) Its possible UEFOC (so over 30% right?) do not suffer as much shaft damage upon impact. However, that is still to be tested more thoroughly, especially including angled shots.

So, assuming that’s all correct, has anyone manufactured an internal footing that meets those specifications? Has any recent studies been conducted about UEFOC arrow shaft integrity? Are the Grizzly Stiks the strongest carbon shaft on the market?

I appreciate the help, seeing as how this subject has been brought up a lot and you have explained this many times,

preston

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #45758

That’s an excellent publication. I wonder, Dave, did you happen to read the new NatGeo article about cougars and then search for this article after it briefly mentioned these findings?

I take it you mean “the facts are confusing common sense” = killing more animals does not mean less complaints, is that what you were getting at? As mentioned in the NatGeo article, and what this publication suggests, is that cougar hunting tends to focus more on big tom cats. And that may be the root of the problem. I think, in general, more scientists and some hunters are realizing we cannot focus our harvest only on one sex-age class without a resulting shift in the animal’s demographics and behavior.

For example, California has been a buck only state for decades, and more and more hunters complain they don’t see as many big bucks as the used to. And that’s probably true, cause now we have does living until their upper teens and even into their twenties, not necessarily as reproductively successful as they used to be, and competing for food with the rest of the herd. Its clear to some folks that we should allow some does harvest to balance the sex ratio. But that won’t fly as long as our Wildlife Commission board is run by politicians instead of biologists.

I think this article is great, because it illuminates the direct result of our harvest-management plan, and that is something that really interests me. If we understand more about an animal, then our harvest plans can be better structured to have desirable results. For instance, with cougars, maybe we have to encourage hunters to take a mixed bag of females and males, instead of only big males.

Jim, you nailed it, in my opinion. The subadult cougars, A) do not have a home range yet, therefore, cannot hunt as efficiently (just like us, its harder to walk into new woods and kill a deer with a longbow, than in your backyard) and B) They are not yet very good at killing large prey; its challenging and there is probably a steep learning curve involved in bringing down an animal as big or bigger than you.

Dave, when you say the effects on wild prey, do you mean- how does harvesting mature toms and the resulting increase in younger male cougars effect wild prey populations? That indeed would be a good thing to study. There’s a lot more to it than just the ungulates. I’d bet those subadult cougars are eating lots of smaller prey like rabbits, squirrels, etc… and then having a greater effect on mesocarnivores than we now know.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Killed a Beautiful Bear Today! #44634

Shane,

The bow is a yew selfbow, 60 pounds. With the help of people on this site I built a realy nice arrow. It is an EFOC, about 28%, using a 225 grain tuffhead, a 175 grain insert/adapter combo, and a 90 grain 3″ brass footing (for extra weight and strength behind the head) on a carbon arrow came out to 712 grains about.

The tuffhead is still sharp, but the arrow shaft broke, after the hit.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Killed a Beautiful Bear Today! #40968

Thanks man. Have fun with the Hickory and Osage. That’s one of the things I miss about the east coast woods, lots of trees to make bows from.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Killed a Beautiful Bear Today! #39598

Tailfeather,

Yeah it is, pacific yew. I cut the tree down about 40 miles east in the mountains from where I shot the bear. Its about 60 pounds. I made it really long, so the draw is smooth. The next one I’m going to make this winter will be a shorter 50# bow.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Bear Care #39593

etter1 wrote: I was high on the kill number. We killed 511 in 2011 in north ga. I dont know the estimated population but it is growing all the time and expanding out of the mtns and up from florida. I do know that i went on eight scouting hikes last summer and saw bears on every one of them.

That makes more sense. I checked out the GA Fish and Game website and they said there are estimated 5,000 bears in the state. So thats about a 10% harvest. Seems like most of them are concentrated in a couple areas, so the density is high. Sounds like a great place to watch with bears.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Bear Care #39091

etter1 wrote: I don’t know how many we kill every year but it’s definitely over 2000 by now.

Hey Etter, How many bears do you think Georgia has? In CA, the statewide quota is 1700 bears a year, and I would think we have a lot more bears than Georgia. You mentioned the state is trying to reduce the bear population, why?

In regards to the original post. In CA, we have to present the skull, so a biologist can pull a tooth for aging, and we get the tag countersigned, which is attached to the ear of the skin. But it doesn’t matter how it comes in, which is good. I’ve had the opportunity to shoot, but didn’t, bears 4-5 miles from my truck in rugged country. No way I would get those animals out in one piece.

I don’t have a meat cooler, don’t go to a butchers, and its usually too warm to hang meat outside for very long. So once I get an animal home I butcher and package it as quickly as I can. That being said, I’ve shot a couple deer in the middle of a hot day (80’s+) and boned out the meat into game bags, gotten home at dusk. Those deer were in the game bags all afternoon, and the meat was great.

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: More international good press for bowhunting #35054

If this is considered hijacking, let me know and I’ll move over to a new post.

“I agree wholeheartedly that the bow and arrow are poorly suited to suburban hunts intended to reduce nuisance game populations. They tried that on the moose in Anchorage some years back, and the “bowhunt” was a disaster for just the reasons illustrated in this photo. But other than that, what’s the point? Someone made a bad shot and failed to recover the animal. Let all those who have never had this happen to them cast the first stones. Don”

Don, what eventually happened with the moose in Anchorage?

I had been under the impression that bowhunting was the ideal tool to reduce deer populations in suburban environments. Mainly because a rifle bullet could go through a house (also the reason you can’t hunt with a rifle in Massachusetts). However, I can see how these kind of situations would go over poorly with the general public.

But, if our state game agency has determined deer are overpopulated and causing harm to the forest, then what options are we left with? Allow the system to continue as is. The game agency can come in a cull enough of the deer to bring them to the desired number. Or we can allow hunters to harvest animals as a tool to lower the population.

I think with enough town hall meetings, public awareness campaigns, etc. the public will hopefully support hunting as a tool instead of culling or letting the deer remain at an unstable, high population. But that would mean an honest look at bowhunting, and the hard truth that animals get injured, and animals die (as in all hunting, and in all natural systems).

Preston

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: a video of a "outside of the box" hunt #32147

One time while working in the Rocky’s during winter, I found where some coyotes had killed a big mule deer buck. All they had eaten was the front shoulder, as the kill was very fresh. So I cut the backstraps and hams off that deer and took it home! Sometimes it goes the other way and I’m the scavenger!!

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: First deer and thanks to Tradbow folks #29304

Hey that’s great. Congrats! I can’t quite tell from the image, but is the left antler just a forked eye guard?

[Ptaylor]

in reply to: Longbow Doe #20518

Nice job man! Really like the hat too. Is it made from real maple leaves?

[Author]

Posts