Cougar hunting proposal

[mcrawfordaf]

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".


Knowlton,1972:  Noted the death of alpha pairs in packs stimulates breeding among formerly behaviorally sterile pack members, promotes immigration of transient coyotes, and that litter size can be affected by population density; reporting average litter sizes of 4.3 at high coyote densities and 6.9 at low coyote densities(I)

Connolly and Longhurst, 1975/ Connolly, 1978:  Noted that in most situations, killing coyotes even at rates of up to 70% of their population merely stimulates reproduction and aggravates the problem.(II)

Bekoff, 1977:  Noted that in more coyote females breed when food is abundant and that during years when rodent populations are high, as many as 75% of yearling females may breed.(III)

New York State DEC, 1991:  Noted females will not breed if food is in short supply or their numbers are too high for the available food and space, liter sizes will be smaller with less abundant food sources, random hunting and trapping and year-round hunting will not reduce coyote populations, and if a breeding female is removed, a previous non-breeder may take her place.(VI)

Connolly, 1995:  Noted that upon review of the Connolly and Longhurst model of 1975,  those biological concepts seemed just as valid in 1995 and that new studies have tended to reaffirm those coyote population mechanics rather than prove them wrong.(V)

Fox and Papouchis, 2005: Noted the failure of extreme, indiscriminate killing of coyotes due to their adaptability within their diet, as well as reproductive and immigration response, and that resources would be better spent on long-term, humane coexistence methods.(VI)

Schadler, 2010:  Noted that pack disruption stimulates breeding among previously behaviorally sterile pack members and that coyote fertility varies based on food availability; improved nutrition releases hormonal signals that result in more egg production in females, causing an increase of population upon the next mating cycle following a temporary decrease in population.(VII)

Minnie, Gaylard, and Kerley, 2015:  Noted compensatory reproduction and immigration response in adaptive and indiscriminately killed predators such as the jackal and the coyote.(VIII)

Crabtree, 2015: Explained the scientific theory of compensatory reproductive response; further solidifying the growing acceptance of the predator reproductive response theory among scientists.(IX)

Kierepka, Kilgo and Rhodes, 2017:  Noted that coyotes recover from intensive trapping via reproduction and immigration, which likely make preventing compensation difficult.(X)

[hunter399]

Thanks for the link comment added more tags!

Here is what we are up against the lack of knowledge in this persons statement is mind boggling!


"Why don't you reduce human hunting of elk until the population bounces back? Killing off a part of the ecosystem doesn't make sense. Cougars can never do as much damage as advanced hunters who use technology. Please compare how many humans kill off elk vs cougars in the area".

It's pretty obvious that antlerless hunts should be put on hold. I don't think any hunters want to destroy an ecosystem.
At the same time ungulate and predators need management to equal the playing field in order to keep a equal balance between ungulate and predator and humans.

I'm no expert on the Blues elk herd.
Wolves are not being managed in Washington. I'm a firm believer that these cougar are trying to adapt to a new ecosystem. Cougar was top predator ,not any more.
A pecking order so to speak.
What happens when you kill A lot of coyote in area?
The next year they have bigger litters,and even more coyote appear.
This is just a thought......
Cougar are adapteing by breeding more,bigger litters.
Also if a cougar kills an Elk,eats,covers the kill.
Then other predators find that and eat it.
Will cause that cougar to kill another Elk.
Wolves and coyote will eat anything dead or alive.

The ecosystem is changing......
99% of hunters have some conservationists in them.
At the same time,we also don't want to lose hunting as recreation and food for the freezer.

There is supposed to be a predator/prey study coming out.
But I assume it will protect wolves at all cost. And will really do nothing to add insight to some of what I mentioned above.

The sad reality is....
More than likely if Elk numbers continue to drop in coming years. WDFW big plan will be to turn elk hunting there into permit draw hunting only.

Just some things to think about our current ecosystem

Wanted to add this....
You could kill every cougar in the state,and we would just become a wolf stronghold.
Until wolves and cougar are managed properly ,we will continue to see declines in ungulate herds.

I do not believe cougar are trying to adapt to a "new ecosystem".  Within the ecosystem, I believe biotic components, namely predator/prey animals, are trying to adjust to changes brought on by the addition of the wolf.

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".

I think bringing back bait/hounds may as well be in outer space as there doesn't seem to be a possibility of a new vote on those measures let alone enough support to change the outcome in a state with an ever growing population that is either indifferent to or against hunting.

Even if quotas and seasons were drastically changed, WITH OUT hounds, not much will change.  Just because there could be more opportunity doesn't mean change is imminent.  Last year or 2 was covid, this next season the price of fuel will probably have a greater effect than covid. 

Bears, wolves, and cougars are all the problem, and they simply are not managed properly by wdfw because of their political nature.

I do agree with ya.
New ecosystem is probably not the right wording.
Current ecosystem adjusting to our new predator.
Wolves and cougar are in direct competition for food.
Before they where not.

You have to agree with that.

Cougar having bigger litter is just theory, No facts or research for that. Maybe not even bigger litter,maybe better survival rate or something . Wolves coming back and knocking them down the food chain or causing them to make more kills,might raise the survival rates for kittens.
 
Just a theory.

I also agree with ya.
Managed properly means
Trapping for wolves
Hounds for cats.

Your right again!!!
We won't get management like hounds for cats.
For sure won't see any wolf management.

But I do think giving hunters more opportunity is better than nothing.
WDFW hands are tied with hounds or wolf management.
At least they are trying to give hunters more opportunity.

[idaho guy]

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".


Knowlton,1972:  Noted the death of alpha pairs in packs stimulates breeding among formerly behaviorally sterile pack members, promotes immigration of transient coyotes, and that litter size can be affected by population density; reporting average litter sizes of 4.3 at high coyote densities and 6.9 at low coyote densities(I)

Connolly and Longhurst, 1975/ Connolly, 1978:  Noted that in most situations, killing coyotes even at rates of up to 70% of their population merely stimulates reproduction and aggravates the problem.(II)

Bekoff, 1977:  Noted that in more coyote females breed when food is abundant and that during years when rodent populations are high, as many as 75% of yearling females may breed.(III)

New York State DEC, 1991:  Noted females will not breed if food is in short supply or their numbers are too high for the available food and space, liter sizes will be smaller with less abundant food sources, random hunting and trapping and year-round hunting will not reduce coyote populations, and if a breeding female is removed, a previous non-breeder may take her place.(VI)

Connolly, 1995:  Noted that upon review of the Connolly and Longhurst model of 1975,  those biological concepts seemed just as valid in 1995 and that new studies have tended to reaffirm those coyote population mechanics rather than prove them wrong.(V)

Fox and Papouchis, 2005: Noted the failure of extreme, indiscriminate killing of coyotes due to their adaptability within their diet, as well as reproductive and immigration response, and that resources would be better spent on long-term, humane coexistence methods.(VI)

Schadler, 2010:  Noted that pack disruption stimulates breeding among previously behaviorally sterile pack members and that coyote fertility varies based on food availability; improved nutrition releases hormonal signals that result in more egg production in females, causing an increase of population upon the next mating cycle following a temporary decrease in population.(VII)

Minnie, Gaylard, and Kerley, 2015:  Noted compensatory reproduction and immigration response in adaptive and indiscriminately killed predators such as the jackal and the coyote.(VIII)

Crabtree, 2015: Explained the scientific theory of compensatory reproductive response; further solidifying the growing acceptance of the predator reproductive response theory among scientists.(IX)

Kierepka, Kilgo and Rhodes, 2017:  Noted that coyotes recover from intensive trapping via reproduction and immigration, which likely make preventing compensation difficult.(X)

     


Uggh no offense to you but I get sick every time I read one of these “science “ studies. It all started with Farley mowat who fell in love with wolves in the 70s.  Birth rates vary based on available prey. Killing coyotes, wolves and lions does NOT lead to a greater abundance of coyotes, wolves and lions that is such a circular ridiculous argument it would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous. These studies are all done from the perspective of don’t hunt or trap predators in any way or form. I know it’s written by a biologist most of the time but that’s where this flawed logic started in the university system. You are living with the results of these studies right now in Washington. Is it working for you? This is exactly what these studies were designed to create . No or ineffective management of predators. The point of those “studies “ are you shouldn’t hunt or trap predators because it will just create more. Really? You are living the affects of these “studies “ right now. Does it work for your ungulates or hunting? These folks have college degrees but ask yourselves where did the pro predator anti hunting and anti gun philosophy start? This is not directed at you at all it’s just the stupidity of these studies in my mind. There is a hidden agenda and it’s not good for the future of hunting. I have personally witnessed a major reduction in coyotes through trapping certain ranches. I have seen lion population plummet from hound hunting (which I am not in favor of)but I have seen it in my hound hunting spots. Think about what they are actually saying-if we hunt or trap predators we will have MORE predators. What does everyone think the real goal is here?

[hunter399]

There are so many factor of "why" so many predators.
The main take away is ,too many cats.
WDFW hands are tied on most management tools.
The only tool left in the tool box is.....
Hunter opportunity.
Which is fine by me.

[buckfvr]

The sharpest tool in the box is the one they are using now for removal.  The majority of the cats "removed", are NOT in areas hunters can hunt freely.  They are mostly on or near private property.

The very effective and professional hounds men wdfw and tri-county are using now for conflict removal could and should be used in the blue mountains to eliminate "X" number of cats in order to get a better grip on the problem.  Second tags and no quotas and open season on cats could also make a contribution, but for immediate results, the pros need to get in there and make a difference.  No amount of voting is going to resurrect public hound hunting but wdfw can certainly use them in the current manner being used in other areas without legal fallout.

 

[callturner]

Probably the smartest idea next to completly opening hound hunting again!

[mcrawfordaf]

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".


Knowlton,1972:  Noted the death of alpha pairs in packs stimulates breeding among formerly behaviorally sterile pack members, promotes immigration of transient coyotes, and that litter size can be affected by population density; reporting average litter sizes of 4.3 at high coyote densities and 6.9 at low coyote densities(I)

Connolly and Longhurst, 1975/ Connolly, 1978:  Noted that in most situations, killing coyotes even at rates of up to 70% of their population merely stimulates reproduction and aggravates the problem.(II)

Bekoff, 1977:  Noted that in more coyote females breed when food is abundant and that during years when rodent populations are high, as many as 75% of yearling females may breed.(III)

New York State DEC, 1991:  Noted females will not breed if food is in short supply or their numbers are too high for the available food and space, liter sizes will be smaller with less abundant food sources, random hunting and trapping and year-round hunting will not reduce coyote populations, and if a breeding female is removed, a previous non-breeder may take her place.(VI)

Connolly, 1995:  Noted that upon review of the Connolly and Longhurst model of 1975,  those biological concepts seemed just as valid in 1995 and that new studies have tended to reaffirm those coyote population mechanics rather than prove them wrong.(V)

Fox and Papouchis, 2005: Noted the failure of extreme, indiscriminate killing of coyotes due to their adaptability within their diet, as well as reproductive and immigration response, and that resources would be better spent on long-term, humane coexistence methods.(VI)

Schadler, 2010:  Noted that pack disruption stimulates breeding among previously behaviorally sterile pack members and that coyote fertility varies based on food availability; improved nutrition releases hormonal signals that result in more egg production in females, causing an increase of population upon the next mating cycle following a temporary decrease in population.(VII)

Minnie, Gaylard, and Kerley, 2015:  Noted compensatory reproduction and immigration response in adaptive and indiscriminately killed predators such as the jackal and the coyote.(VIII)

Crabtree, 2015: Explained the scientific theory of compensatory reproductive response; further solidifying the growing acceptance of the predator reproductive response theory among scientists.(IX)

Kierepka, Kilgo and Rhodes, 2017:  Noted that coyotes recover from intensive trapping via reproduction and immigration, which likely make preventing compensation difficult.(X)

     


Uggh no offense to you but I get sick every time I read one of these “science “ studies. It all started with Farley mowat who fell in love with wolves in the 70s.  Birth rates vary based on available prey. Killing coyotes, wolves and lions does NOT lead to a greater abundance of coyotes, wolves and lions that is such a circular ridiculous argument it would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous. These studies are all done from the perspective of don’t hunt or trap predators in any way or form. I know it’s written by a biologist most of the time but that’s where this flawed logic started in the university system. You are living with the results of these studies right now in Washington. Is it working for you? This is exactly what these studies were designed to create . No or ineffective management of predators. The point of those “studies “ are you shouldn’t hunt or trap predators because it will just create more. Really? You are living the affects of these “studies “ right now. Does it work for your ungulates or hunting? These folks have college degrees but ask yourselves where did the pro predator anti hunting and anti gun philosophy start? This is not directed at you at all it’s just the stupidity of these studies in my mind. There is a hidden agenda and it’s not good for the future of hunting. I have personally witnessed a major reduction in coyotes through trapping certain ranches. I have seen lion population plummet from hound hunting (which I am not in favor of)but I have seen it in my hound hunting spots. Think about what they are actually saying-if we hunt or trap predators we will have MORE predators. What does everyone think the real goal is here?

I'm very much pro-predator hunting. The ending of derby hunts for coyotes was incredibly disappointing for me, as my father and I were beginning to prepare for entering some together. I just wanted to provide some of the "studies" I've come across while debating antis. I did pest control for 4 years in PA and I know for a fact removing and killing predators helps reduce populations. These are mammals, I don't believe they have any way of recognizing or communicating that their pack size has increased or decreased in such a way that they can alter reproduction. Ants can do this, bees as well but I just don't see how mammals could.

[buckfvr]

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".


Knowlton,1972:  Noted the death of alpha pairs in packs stimulates breeding among formerly behaviorally sterile pack members, promotes immigration of transient coyotes, and that litter size can be affected by population density; reporting average litter sizes of 4.3 at high coyote densities and 6.9 at low coyote densities(I)

Connolly and Longhurst, 1975/ Connolly, 1978:  Noted that in most situations, killing coyotes even at rates of up to 70% of their population merely stimulates reproduction and aggravates the problem.(II)

Bekoff, 1977:  Noted that in more coyote females breed when food is abundant and that during years when rodent populations are high, as many as 75% of yearling females may breed.(III)

New York State DEC, 1991:  Noted females will not breed if food is in short supply or their numbers are too high for the available food and space, liter sizes will be smaller with less abundant food sources, random hunting and trapping and year-round hunting will not reduce coyote populations, and if a breeding female is removed, a previous non-breeder may take her place.(VI)

Connolly, 1995:  Noted that upon review of the Connolly and Longhurst model of 1975,  those biological concepts seemed just as valid in 1995 and that new studies have tended to reaffirm those coyote population mechanics rather than prove them wrong.(V)

Fox and Papouchis, 2005: Noted the failure of extreme, indiscriminate killing of coyotes due to their adaptability within their diet, as well as reproductive and immigration response, and that resources would be better spent on long-term, humane coexistence methods.(VI)

Schadler, 2010:  Noted that pack disruption stimulates breeding among previously behaviorally sterile pack members and that coyote fertility varies based on food availability; improved nutrition releases hormonal signals that result in more egg production in females, causing an increase of population upon the next mating cycle following a temporary decrease in population.(VII)

Minnie, Gaylard, and Kerley, 2015:  Noted compensatory reproduction and immigration response in adaptive and indiscriminately killed predators such as the jackal and the coyote.(VIII)

Crabtree, 2015: Explained the scientific theory of compensatory reproductive response; further solidifying the growing acceptance of the predator reproductive response theory among scientists.(IX)

Kierepka, Kilgo and Rhodes, 2017:  Noted that coyotes recover from intensive trapping via reproduction and immigration, which likely make preventing compensation difficult.(X)

     


Uggh no offense to you but I get sick every time I read one of these “science “ studies. It all started with Farley mowat who fell in love with wolves in the 70s.  Birth rates vary based on available prey. Killing coyotes, wolves and lions does NOT lead to a greater abundance of coyotes, wolves and lions that is such a circular ridiculous argument it would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous. These studies are all done from the perspective of don’t hunt or trap predators in any way or form. I know it’s written by a biologist most of the time but that’s where this flawed logic started in the university system. You are living with the results of these studies right now in Washington. Is it working for you? This is exactly what these studies were designed to create . No or ineffective management of predators. The point of those “studies “ are you shouldn’t hunt or trap predators because it will just create more. Really? You are living the affects of these “studies “ right now. Does it work for your ungulates or hunting? These folks have college degrees but ask yourselves where did the pro predator anti hunting and anti gun philosophy start? This is not directed at you at all it’s just the stupidity of these studies in my mind. There is a hidden agenda and it’s not good for the future of hunting. I have personally witnessed a major reduction in coyotes through trapping certain ranches. I have seen lion population plummet from hound hunting (which I am not in favor of)but I have seen it in my hound hunting spots. Think about what they are actually saying-if we hunt or trap predators we will have MORE predators. What does everyone think the real goal is here?

Ya, talk about agenda driven studies......Ever notice who ever pays for a study always winds up with it supporting their ideals/agendas ?

[buckfvr]

Last year I killed 12 coyotes here and this year Ive only seen one @ 600 yards that wasnt about to stop for a shot.  My neighbor has some sheep and goats that were a real draw for the dogs but not so much now.  I watch her fields as much now as I ever have and Ive not seen a single yote near her place.  The one I saw was 600 yards other side of me going away so 1000 yards from her critters.

[hunter399]

The sharpest tool in the box is the one they are using now for removal.  The majority of the cats "removed", are NOT in areas hunters can hunt freely.  They are mostly on or near private property.

The very effective and professional hounds men wdfw and tri-county are using now for conflict removal could and should be used in the blue mountains to eliminate "X" number of cats in order to get a better grip on the problem.  Second tags and no quotas and open season on cats could also make a contribution, but for immediate results, the pros need to get in there and make a difference.  No amount of voting is going to resurrect public hound hunting but wdfw can certainly use them in the current manner being used in other areas without legal fallout.

That tool isn't in the box for elk management.
It's there for safety and cats that attack livestock.
You can't kill cats cause they are hunting deer and elk ,there primary food source.

[buckfvr]

That tool is certainly in the box for cat management and thats what it is once they decide to change cat harvest guidelines, unless you have talked to wdfw about it and you are quoting wdfw.

[Okanagan]

Bit of a tangent here but several have mentioned increased reproduction of coyotes when some are killed.  OK.  That is virtually irrelevant to a rancher whose sheep or calves are being killed by coyotes today.  The coyote he kills today will not kill his calf (nor birthing cow) tonight. The coyote he kills as it chases sheep or stands at the rump of a birthing cow is the critical factor in coyote population.    Next year’s coyote reproduction rate is a different problem with a different timeline and different solution than the best one to deal with the coyote after a calf in my pasture right now.

Theories and studies are useful, especially if they lead to solutions, but a step out of the ivory tower into a springtime rancher’s boots would add some wisdom to facts and a better practical understanding of the problem. 

[hunter399]

That tool is certainly in the box for cat management and thats what it is once they decide to change cat harvest guidelines, unless you have talked to wdfw about it and you are quoting wdfw.

No I'm not quoting WDFW.
But here is a quote from WDFW...

Currently there are no management needs warranting this permit program. The department will update this site a necessary.

Here is a link .....read for yourself.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/special-hunts/cougar

At this time it's only safety removal.

[idaho guy]

Please share your source of study information about coyotes, and cougar adapting to breed "more, bigger litters".


Knowlton,1972:  Noted the death of alpha pairs in packs stimulates breeding among formerly behaviorally sterile pack members, promotes immigration of transient coyotes, and that litter size can be affected by population density; reporting average litter sizes of 4.3 at high coyote densities and 6.9 at low coyote densities(I)

Connolly and Longhurst, 1975/ Connolly, 1978:  Noted that in most situations, killing coyotes even at rates of up to 70% of their population merely stimulates reproduction and aggravates the problem.(II)

Bekoff, 1977:  Noted that in more coyote females breed when food is abundant and that during years when rodent populations are high, as many as 75% of yearling females may breed.(III)

New York State DEC, 1991:  Noted females will not breed if food is in short supply or their numbers are too high for the available food and space, liter sizes will be smaller with less abundant food sources, random hunting and trapping and year-round hunting will not reduce coyote populations, and if a breeding female is removed, a previous non-breeder may take her place.(VI)

Connolly, 1995:  Noted that upon review of the Connolly and Longhurst model of 1975,  those biological concepts seemed just as valid in 1995 and that new studies have tended to reaffirm those coyote population mechanics rather than prove them wrong.(V)

Fox and Papouchis, 2005: Noted the failure of extreme, indiscriminate killing of coyotes due to their adaptability within their diet, as well as reproductive and immigration response, and that resources would be better spent on long-term, humane coexistence methods.(VI)

Schadler, 2010:  Noted that pack disruption stimulates breeding among previously behaviorally sterile pack members and that coyote fertility varies based on food availability; improved nutrition releases hormonal signals that result in more egg production in females, causing an increase of population upon the next mating cycle following a temporary decrease in population.(VII)

Minnie, Gaylard, and Kerley, 2015:  Noted compensatory reproduction and immigration response in adaptive and indiscriminately killed predators such as the jackal and the coyote.(VIII)

Crabtree, 2015: Explained the scientific theory of compensatory reproductive response; further solidifying the growing acceptance of the predator reproductive response theory among scientists.(IX)

Kierepka, Kilgo and Rhodes, 2017:  Noted that coyotes recover from intensive trapping via reproduction and immigration, which likely make preventing compensation difficult.(X)

     


Uggh no offense to you but I get sick every time I read one of these “science “ studies. It all started with Farley mowat who fell in love with wolves in the 70s.  Birth rates vary based on available prey. Killing coyotes, wolves and lions does NOT lead to a greater abundance of coyotes, wolves and lions that is such a circular ridiculous argument it would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous. These studies are all done from the perspective of don’t hunt or trap predators in any way or form. I know it’s written by a biologist most of the time but that’s where this flawed logic started in the university system. You are living with the results of these studies right now in Washington. Is it working for you? This is exactly what these studies were designed to create . No or ineffective management of predators. The point of those “studies “ are you shouldn’t hunt or trap predators because it will just create more. Really? You are living the affects of these “studies “ right now. Does it work for your ungulates or hunting? These folks have college degrees but ask yourselves where did the pro predator anti hunting and anti gun philosophy start? This is not directed at you at all it’s just the stupidity of these studies in my mind. There is a hidden agenda and it’s not good for the future of hunting. I have personally witnessed a major reduction in coyotes through trapping certain ranches. I have seen lion population plummet from hound hunting (which I am not in favor of)but I have seen it in my hound hunting spots. Think about what they are actually saying-if we hunt or trap predators we will have MORE predators. What does everyone think the real goal is here?

 

I'm very much pro-predator hunting. The ending  of derby hunts for coyotes was incredibly disappointing for me, as my father and I were beginning to prepare for entering some together. I just wanted to provide some of the "studies" I've come across while debating antis. I did pest control for 4 years in PA and I know for a fact removing and killing predators helps reduce populations. These are mammals, I don't believe they have any way of recognizing or communicating that their pack size has increased or decreased in such a way that they can alter reproduction. Ants can do this, bees as well but I just don't see how mammals could.

     


I assumed you were just posting study to respond to the other one asking for it . Like I said my post was not directed at you just ranting on the biased study concerning predators. They are basically saying removing predators creates more and it’s such bull crap I had too comment ha ha. It’s all good I figured we agreed

[buckfvr]

wdfw policy and practice subject to change at any second.