Wednesday, March 04, 2009

From my point of view

My point of view doesn't match those ranchers around the SSB. Of course, my training happens to be in biology with heavy emphasis on wild life biology. In my skewed view, this makes me a tad more of an expert - but if I were to speak out, I would clash terribly with those ranchers there.

These people have a "society" that dedicates itself to getting rid of all the critters there. They have a bounty on all sorts of predators. They are particularly after old wily coyote. But he certainly is not alone.

In one of the weekly papers, a cousin of mine made the remark to be careful when out in the pasture. I cougar was sited with some type of prey in its mouth. Right now that country is gripped in such a drought that its hard going on all animals, and what few prey animals that are around are being forced into closed contact with humans. She was correct - you should be wary of the cougar. They can, and do, cause great harm to humans. In times like this - it very well may attack calves, kids or fawns. All those things are a threat to the ranchers in the hill country.

But in better times, these people are hell bent on ridding the area of all coyotes, foxes, bob cats, and cougars. They have "round ups" of the various body parts for the bounty. They believe this will mean that their livestock will be safe.

Then they wonder why we are over run with mice, rats, rabbits, and the like. On our place, there is specific prohibitions to shooting anything that you don't intent to eat. If you shoot it, you better plan a meal from it.

This comes to mind because out closest neighbors (the ones who are not family) have been visited by an armadillo recently. We really thought the fire ants had wiped out the armadillos. My biology friends, and others I am sure, have nick named the armadillo the Texas Speed Bump. In the past, you would travel the roads and there would be many of them dead on the road. It wasn't that people would intentionally try to hit them, it was a fatal flaw in their nervous system. When they are startled - like by a car coming at them on the road - they would jump up straignt in the air about 2 feet. That is right at bumper height. That makes the equation of car+armadillo = dead armadillo.

Skunks have also become a great problem in the places around the SSB. Again - we have no predators. All these animals will bloom if their checks are gone. The skunk is a real problem, and not just because of his odor. In Texas, you can figure that if you see a skunk, he has rabies. That makes them really scary.

Of course, a small predator in the area is fighting rabies also, and I fear for them. The foxes in the area seem to mostly be rabid. We have one family back on the ridge, and I really don't think they have rabies because they have been observed for about three years now. I won't push my luck to find out, but even though most of the foxes may be vectors for rabies, I think our little group is healthy.

Anyway, in my opinion, the bounties should be lifted. At church the other week, our insurance guy admitted that the coyotes weren't the real problem for his livestock. It was the feral pigs that have taken over the place - and so much of Texas. There is no bounty on them - yet.

In the meantime, we will have our bloom of rats, mice, rabbits, skunks, etc - IF it ever rains again.

Peace.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I have seen both sides of this argument and I don't see why we can't just let nature take its course. The predators will keep the population of the "nuisance" animals down.

On the other hand, I remember as a small child, my Daddy, his father and uncle and several neighboring farmers hunting all day for a coyote because it had killed some of their sheep. AND I know, if any predator had killed any of my Daddy's cows, he would have been out with his gun hunting the varmit down.

I don't believe in killing any animal (unless it is a snake), but the white tail deer herds have become so prevalent here in Michigan and cause so much crop damage, that hunters are now allowed to take two deer. The hunters I know DO eat what they kill so I guess it is all right?

I don't know, personally? I still see the movie Bambi running out into the meadow called, "Mother, Mother". He couldn't find her because she had been killed.

Anonymous said...

I have seen both sides of this argument and I don't see why we can't just let nature take its course. The predators will keep the population of the "nuisance" animals down.

On the other hand, I remember as a small child, my Daddy, his father and uncle and several neighboring farmers hunting all day for a coyote because it had killed some of their sheep. AND I know, if any predator had killed any of my Daddy's cows, he would have been out with his gun hunting the varmit down.

I don't believe in killing any animal (unless it is a snake), but the white tail deer herds have become so prevalent here in Michigan and cause so much crop damage, that hunters are now allowed to take two deer. The hunters I know DO eat what they kill so I guess it is all right?

I don't know, personally? I still see the movie Bambi running out into the meadow calling, "Mother, Mother". He couldn't find her because she had been killed.

Grandma K said...

We hunt deer on our property. Our herds are so big that you can take several deer - only two bucks. I don't remember how many more, I think possibly two. We allow each FAMILY unit to take five. That goes for our hunters who lease from us. They seldom take more than two.

I am definitely not against hunting, I just don't personally do it. The rest of my family does. But we don't let them kill just to kill with the possible exception of the feral hogs. Generally the one that is killed is used for sausage.

I know predators can be a problem. They may well be a problem this year because there simply is not rain. That is going to take its toll on the fawn crop, the rabbits, and so on. I just hate to see bounties on the animals.