Post by: billythekidrock on November 20, 2007, 05:12:58 PM
Heard rumors and looking for the story.
Post by: billythekidrock on November 21, 2007, 05:41:27 PM
Post by: Jackjr on November 21, 2007, 05:53:53 PM
Post by: russ on November 21, 2007, 08:13:44 PM
Post by: Jackjr on November 21, 2007, 08:24:30 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on November 21, 2007, 09:21:23 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 22, 2007, 03:21:39 PM
Post by: russ on November 22, 2007, 05:27:36 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 23, 2007, 05:20:38 PM
Cats are solitary, the only time you would come across that many together is with a family group. The mother and the rest are adult sized kittens (1-1.5 yrs) that have not dispersed yet. I have seen 4 together once and they were all big.
Post by: russ on November 23, 2007, 05:48:30 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 23, 2007, 06:40:10 PM
Quote
I did hear one guy shot both cougars, which is illegallNot illegal if he purchased both tags. I usually purchase both bear tags before the season, but I really doubt many purchase two cougar tags ahead of time.
But other than that, you hit the nail on the head. That is the same story I heard, almost verbatim.
Post by: Cougeyes on November 23, 2007, 07:04:23 PM
Post by: deerslyr on November 23, 2007, 07:43:21 PM
Post by: actionshooter on November 24, 2007, 09:54:38 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 25, 2007, 06:09:48 AM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 25, 2007, 07:12:51 AM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 25, 2007, 09:01:51 AM
Post by: Machias on November 25, 2007, 09:12:03 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 25, 2007, 09:35:25 PM
Post by: BrushChimp on November 25, 2007, 11:01:25 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 26, 2007, 06:00:06 AM
Quote
37 pounds, that is sad. Embarassing actually!
This was the reason for my post to begin with. I was curious about the size of "4-5" cougars in a group.
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 07:27:11 AM
at least his deer killin days are over before they started. I'll smoke em too.
It doesn't matter, no matter how many cougars you take out of an area they will be replaced quite soon from immigrants from another area, the mother will go into estrus quite soon and have another litter. Unless you totally hammer the cats in an area they will always remain there.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 07:56:44 AM
Post by: Machias on November 26, 2007, 10:01:24 AM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 10:14:12 AM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 11:04:04 AM
So as I stated before, killing a cougar here and there as your "predator control management" likely does nothing to the actual amount of cougars out there because they will immigrate from long distances into that area, filling the vacany of the previous cougar. In some sense if there were 4 or 5 cougars in that group where those 2 were shot it may eleviate some stress on the mother and actually increase the likelihood that the others will survive, but i agree if you have a tag it doesn't mean that you should shoot a 35lb female cougar, nothing really to brag about there.
Post by: Machias on November 26, 2007, 01:17:40 PM
Post by: elkaholic on November 26, 2007, 03:24:52 PM
Fred, good luck with the cats, heading downrange soon for awhile.
Post by: Machias on November 26, 2007, 03:32:23 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 04:40:21 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 26, 2007, 04:57:17 PM
Anyway, there seems to be multiple stories on this cougar hunt or a bunch of cougars were shot over late buck...now I want one!
Post by: elkaholic on November 26, 2007, 05:09:11 PM
I am heading down range for 4 months or so. Would love to get some yotes when I get back.
Post by: elkaholic on November 26, 2007, 05:13:03 PM
Post by: elkaholic on November 26, 2007, 05:15:43 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 05:58:04 PM
As far as not making a differance? I don't know where you're trying to go with that one Cougeyes? Should we close longtail season down because no matter how many we kill they will keep coming back? Without hound hunting we cannot effectively manage these critters over here.No I wasn't implying at all that we should by any means close down cougar seasons. I was just trying to make the point that cougars maintain their own numbers in areas because they're so territorial. I was trying to get across that yes, hunting does manage numbers but they will only rebound soon after unless we shoot the hell out of them. Like you mentioned what the game warden said about thanking the guy for saving the deer, may decrease some predation but it will just rebound to where it was before that cat was killed. My take home message is that there is a thing such as "carrying capacity" and cougars maintain certain numbers. If we were to stop hunting them their numbers would go up, but not to the extremes that many would think because they're such a territorial animal. I would never be against no-cougar hunting, i think it is a necessary tool in management of game numbers, but it is only a tool, there are many more factors that go into managing deer and elk than decreasing predators.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 06:18:13 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 06:33:43 PM
when my neighbors are killing them in their yards on a yearly basis, that tells me they are not being managed correctly.Not entirely, where are these people living? Next to forested areas, have deer in their yards or other livestock? You have to first manage the people before you manage the wildlife. Similar situation to that of your friends. Back home this one family bought 10 acres of forest, feed deer and elk in the winter in their yards, have numerous rabbits in their yard, but then are dumbfounded as to why cougars are showing up as well as bobcats, not a hard question to answer. They were fine at first until one of the cougars killed a housecat then they decided to shoot every cougar they saw. It may not be entirely a mis-management practice on behalf of this state for managing an animal like the cougar, but we as people need to understand the consequences that can come about in these areas that we "share" with wild animals.
Post by: bobcat on November 26, 2007, 06:44:08 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 26, 2007, 06:51:38 PM
Ahhh, now we get on the cougar hound permit subject. Machias correct me if I'm wrong. Dept Game and fish started making people sign an avidavit, stating they hand dogs that could track and tree longtails, due to every Tom Dick and Harry putting in for them and not harvesting enough cougars. Just the other day I was asked if I knew anybody that would take a guy out that had drawn a permit. This guy drew a permit without dogs, after he lied on the affidavit. This is the kinda crap that pisses me off, and why we can't effectivly manage these critters.Cougars are an awesome animal,and if managed right have a place here in Washington, but when my neighbors are killing them in their yards on a yearly basis, that tells me they are not being managed correctly. Good luck Machias, I miss the sound of a couple old walkers barking treed.
So why don't they have two raffles, one for dog owners and one for non owners, pair the two up, let the non owner harvest the first cougar and the dog owners harvest the second? The owners get to chase a couple more critters and non owners get a chance to run behind the hounds. To me it sounds like a win win situation. Otherwise you divide the haves and have nots. Not good.
Post by: Shadow Cat on November 26, 2007, 06:52:24 PM
Post by: elkaholic on November 26, 2007, 07:20:43 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on November 26, 2007, 07:44:30 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on November 26, 2007, 08:09:57 PM
IF cougar numbers basically take care of themselves, then why worry about blasting a 37lb cat?
If after shooting a cougar in area A, cougar populations rebound there from cats migrating in from area B, then doesn't area B have less cougar then? Doesn't area B deer populations benefit from a reduction of cougar there now? (Whew...get what I am trying to say?)
All I know is this. Where we snowshoe around Mt St. Helens is Fing crawling with cougar track. Yes they are pushed here in search of food. Yes some of the tracks are from a single animal. But, I see more now than I ever used to. Same in the Entiat. Same in the Colockum. Same around most everywhere I have gone for twenty years of shoeing. More tracks lately.
If cougars kill half as many deer as I have read they do, I see the need to shoot the cougar. Call me greedy. I want to hunt the deer, not them.
And to answer the question; if there were so many cougar around why don't we all see cougar when we are in the woods.....I thought we all understood that cougar are nocturnal (mostly active at night). How many rats, bats, opossum, owls, skunks, racoons, foxes, have you seen in the daylight? Probably not many. They must not exist.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 08:14:26 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 08:18:56 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 08:21:59 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 08:30:44 PM
Post by: deerslyr on November 26, 2007, 08:31:34 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 08:58:24 PM
The pilot programs started up north were started not due to declining mule deer herds, but more because of human safety, i.e. more complaints in those areas after hound hunting was banned. Yes, there is a decline in Mule deer numbers up north but that is partially due to apparent competition where you have two prey species mule deer and white-tailed deer and cougars as the predator, but it is the white-tailed deer abundance that draws the cougars into these areas where then the cougars prey on the mule deer. There was a study done by WSU researchers on this, i can get the article if anyone wants to read it, the study was done in the "WEdge" and around kettle falls colville. Also, another study was conducted about 5 years ago that shows that infact cougar populations may in fact be declining in parts of the pacific northwest, that too was published in the Journal of Wildlife Management.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 09:09:35 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 10:08:02 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 26, 2007, 10:24:25 PM
Best
Post by: Cougeyes on November 26, 2007, 10:34:31 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on November 27, 2007, 06:15:07 AM
... I never said cougars were anywhere near over carrying capacity, you must have misunderstood me. Yes, cougars in the yard dont mix, that is why I think we should reinstate hound hunting as a better management tool rather, allowing houdsman to be selective on their take rather than boot hunters shooting whatever is infront of them by chance alone.
How is letting houndsmen selectively shooting a mature cat, going to help manage the species when you claim that any cat shot will be replaced? How are cat numbers ever going to get reduced? When the deer population shrinks? The cougar will really be "trashcanning" for house pets then...
Basically houndsmen are the only group of hunters who could select what they shoot. The average hunter never sees a cougar, or seldom. When we do see one, we raise the rifle and shoot, plain and simple. Then we see, hmmm, not as big as I thought, or wow, nice cougar... I can see where houndsmen would want more choice cougar to chase and hunt. I see it. But do you see how us deerhunters want the cougar killed off? Alot!
Secondly, what would be so bad if the cougar population was reduced by half? What species population would have an exponential or similar growth pattern? Most of us do romanticize the thought of a grand cougar stalking it's prey...., I just don't romanticize the thought of them doing it on every ridge I hunt.
My point would be, cougar eat. Cougar that are not afraid of humans eat anywhere they want. I would like to see hound hunting reinstated. I would also like to see the cougar population reduced. Do hound hunters want the cougar population reduced, I doubt it. This is the dichotomy.
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 27, 2007, 06:24:46 AM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 27, 2007, 07:37:51 AM
I dont think cougar numbers in this state are anywhere near alarming numbers where a reduction on their population is on the chopping block. I dont think they should be reduced statewide, but more on the lines of "areas" that pose the greatest risk to people, areas that have the most sightings, or probability of a conflict.
One more point note worthy i think......yes, one cougar may eat 1 deer a week, or one elk every 1.5 weeks, my point is how many deer and elk get ran over on our freeways, and highways every day? I dont know, and i'm sure you dont, but we all see it. We dont consider these facts, just blame the obvious culprits and for good reason I guess.
I've been hunting around the state quite often and am yet to see this drastic decline in deer and elk that everyone is talking about because of cougars. If people dont harvest a deer or dont see a buck then it must be because there is a cougar around or the cougars ate all the deer so nothing is left. Why eliminate or drastically reduce the cougar numbers to have a significantly higher mule deer herd? Are we being selfish? Probably. Hunting is supposed to be hunting, getting out hiking and searching for what you intend to harvest. By significantly increasing say the mule deer everyone's chances are high of harvesting an animal, but how much fun is it to just drive up a road see a deer get out and shoot it, rather than getting out and actually hunting for that animal.
Post by: workstohunt on November 27, 2007, 10:41:03 AM
I agree with 257-- Ive seen more cats in last 10 yrs than ever.
I saw one this morning on Hewitt rd. by 2 houses that have been there forever, I have had them in my driveway in the past.
If the 37 pound cat was legal, why is anyone judging what he should have done??
Everyone has an opinion--as far as myself, I passed on over 20 bucks this year and ate my tag because I chose not to take them, I have passed on cats in the past but probably would have taken this one as well. especially in that area.
Just my $.02 :)
Post by: Skyvalhunter on November 27, 2007, 11:21:07 AM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 27, 2007, 11:57:44 AM
We wouldn't have a 2 cougar limit if the state thought that cougars were in abundance.I dont think that's the case. There is a 2 cougar limit because what are the odds of one person killing two cougars in one year....pretty slim. The state is just giving the boot hunters some le-way. So, if they are over abundant then why aren't hound hunters getting two tags in the NE WA? And i dont agree with you, why would a cougar waste its energy and kill something and not eat it? A cougar is successful at making a kill about 1 out of 5 attempts, so you think after 4 failures they would kill an animal on the 5th and just not eat it? I dont know where you got your info, but i would like to see it.
Post by: bucklucky on November 27, 2007, 12:08:11 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on November 27, 2007, 03:53:49 PM
and another thing cougeyes is wrong bout, is that cats dont eat all of there kill. they only eat fresh kills, thats why they will kill so often, they dont eat it unless its fresh. ive seen alot of cat kills and only half the deer has been eaten or less. and its also a fact that cougars have been known to kill and not even eat it, just kill the animal and walk away
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on November 27, 2007, 04:15:13 PM
In the "old days" people used to shoot LOTS of crows, ravens and magpies. The populations of these birds were lower that they are today. Lions (paramount predator) were able to kill and cache a deer to last a (~)week. Now...there are lots more birds- which find the cache easily- and alert the coyotes/bears to the find. Sooo now that we have lots of the flying scavengers around finding the cache, the lion has to kill more deer (per individual)more frequently to stay fed
Interesting dynamics out there.
Post by: elkaholic on November 27, 2007, 04:17:11 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 27, 2007, 05:10:37 PM
and another thing cougeyes is wrong bout, is that cats dont eat all of there kill. they only eat fresh kills, thats why they will kill so often, they dont eat it unless its fresh. ive seen alot of cat kills and only half the deer has been eaten or less. and its also a fact that cougars have been known to kill and not even eat it, just kill the animal and walk awayWhy dont you go back and re-read my post, i never said anything about them eating their entire kill, I know for a fact they dont, i've come across several too that were only partially eaten, but i dont think it was just due to them killing it for fun and eating part of it, it had to do with spoiling and/or getting kicked off their kill by bears. And you're wrong about them only eating fresh kills. Cougars are opportunistic scavengers as well, they have been known to scavenge kills that they didn't make. I've read a couple articles on some studies done on this exact topic about cougars being scavengers and the researchers took road kill and placed it in several locations and set out trail cameras, they had a high visitation rate of cougars.
Good point made by WAcoyotehunter, never really thought of that, just like the ravens following wolves around in Yellowstone waiting for kills and alterting the other scavengers
Post by: Houndhunter on November 27, 2007, 05:55:32 PM
and if your right then how come cougars kill avg from 5.9 days per kill in the summer time, to up to 7.9-9.2 days in the winter?? could it be becuase the meat spoils faster in the summer, proving that they wont eat old or spoiled meat??
Post by: Cougeyes on November 27, 2007, 06:10:52 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on November 27, 2007, 06:21:49 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 27, 2007, 06:38:11 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on December 12, 2007, 10:07:26 PM
Best
Post by: andrew_12gauge on December 12, 2007, 10:36:25 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on December 13, 2007, 06:50:50 AM
Post by: Houndhunter on December 13, 2007, 02:36:09 PM
Example of cougar populations before hound hunting ban, no cougars or bear in columbia basin, since the ban usually at least one cougar per year and one bear every three or four years. cougars and bears are becoming over populated and are expanding into areas where they are not native. im not for eradicating them completely but the populations are at an all time high and the amount that hunters are taking now isnt high enough to control the skyrocketing population.
part of that aint true, lions are native to every part in washington. they just havnt been as present as they are now. the wdfw says lion and bear comlaints are up 33% since i believe it was 2001, and timber companys are having alota problems with the bears destorying timber and such. and the program they had for getting rid of those bears with hounds aint the most ethical way to some people, so now its pretty muched stopped
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on December 13, 2007, 02:43:16 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on December 13, 2007, 02:51:06 PM
any hound hunter will tell you this, but there is so many lions now in places in eastern washington (stevens pend'orielle being one) that on a good day, meaning weather, you can ALWAYS tree a lion. thats how many there are now, havnt been out this year yet but my uncles have said theres still tons
Post by: LongTatLaw on December 28, 2007, 06:25:12 PM
That said, it sounds like a little mistaken identity on the cat shot by the hunter in the original story. Sounds funny but Ive done the same thing.
I was hunting down in Georgia and a lone doe came out into a green field just at dark. She came to about 40 yards and the 300 win mag touched her in the armpit ... she ran off into the woodline. I gave her 10 minutes and then went after her by flashlight. I went 20 yards into the woods and saw the doe stand up and stand there... so I gave her a second shot to finish her off...
problem was, I shot a 110 pound fat ass doe in the field and followed a blood trail right to a deer standing there not running and acting strange. That 2nd shot actually killed a 2nd doe. This one was probably 50 pounds and was definitely a yearling. The yearling was on the blood trail standing 5 feet from the doe (mother) laying dead just out of sight.
I have killed dozens and dozens of deer. and would never kill a 50 pound yearling... but in context it had to be the same deer.
Now, given the unlikely nature of sighting not one but two cougars a few yards from one another at the exact same time.
I made the mistake on deer...which are very very familiar to me. So the same mistake on cats would be much easier!
That said...he made a mistake. As for me, 40 pound cats should stay far far away from me and the 300!
Im not even doing it to protect the deer. Id just be happy to take any legal cat.
Fell free to comment...lol
Post by: groundhog on January 05, 2008, 07:40:55 AM