Do You Have An Opinion On Killing Predators?

[tom e]

Janine, I don't think that is what I meant to say at all. I agree with everything you just said.

EDIT: Oh! Sorry, I see where our point of contention is.. I'll drop a line on that a little later, we're about to go out to eat.

Happy chicken keeping folks.

 

[janinepeters]

Janine, I don't think that is what I meant to say at all. I agree with everything you just said.

What? Did you think I was arguing with you? I wasn't -- I hadn't even seen what you wrote until after I posted mine. I just read yours now, and actually think you had a good point: In a nutshell, our impact on these animals can be unpredictable, partly because biological systems are complex, and partly because change is happening so quickly.

 

[janinepeters]

Only if you think you can shoot all the predators around you faster than they can reproduce. I guarantee you cannot. If we could, there would be no raccoons in the world.

Sorry, tom e, I had lost track of who said what. You're right, I was disagreeing with you - particularly with that statement quoted above. I thought you were saying it's impossible to kill off a predator faster than the species can reproduce. And someone else was saying you can kill them faster than they can reproduce. I was disagreeing with both of you, because it depends on the species, as well as a whole host of other factors. In the case of the coyote, humans haven't been able to kill them faster than they can reproduce. But other species, other environmental conditions....And you can reduce the population by killing...Sometimes all the way to extinction.

 

[tom e]

Sorry, tom e, I had lost track of who said what. You're right, I was disagreeing with you - particularly with that statement quoted above. I thought you were saying it's impossible to kill off a predator faster than the species can reproduce. And someone else was saying you can kill them faster than they can reproduce. I was disagreeing with both of you, because it depends on the species, as well as a whole host of other factors. In the case of the coyote, humans haven't been able to kill them faster than they can reproduce. But other species, other environmental conditions....And you can reduce the population by killing...Sometimes all the way to extinction.

That's what I thought was our disagreement, but in fact it's only a disagreement with what I wrote and not what I actually believe- if that makes any sense. That's why I said I'd comment on it later.. In other words, I was referring to these animals that folks usually have trouble with because they prosper when living amongst humans. Coyotes, raccoons, opossums, etc. I should have been more specific.
I agree that not every animal can survive extinction when people are after them, I just don't think anyone can wipe out (in the case that I mentioned- should have been more specific) raccoons for instance. If you go out and kill as many as you can per day, you'll not likely see an appreciable difference. I can kill three in a day (maybe, but that's a LONG day of work, lol) and yeah a pair might not reproduce three a year (between 2 and 5 actually per pair) but we're talking about THOUSANDS of pairs here. This is really because even though I can kill every one I see, I won't see but the tip of the iceberg. Raccoons particularly are doing better with modern humans than they likely did before us. In pre- Columbian times, they only in the South Eastern US. Trash is a food source that allows them to breed and breed and breed, where once upon a time, successful breeding might have been limited by the amount of food they could find in the wild, for their young. Some animals are similar in this sense. That's why I'm a little cavalier with my attitude- be my guest, shoot them. I don't feel the same way about hawks and wolves (in whatever small range they might still have.) Believe me, I understand that not all populations of animals are in that same boat.

Bottom line, I think all of our wildlife is a heritage that we have and should be proud of. I think we owe it to our descendants to keep them around. If you follow the laws, and shoot what is legal as you see fit, I don't have a problem with that. Believe me, if Fish and Game thought there was a chance that we could wipe out the raccoon, it would be a protected species. At that point my attitude would change about that.

Now if we're talking about protecting our chickens, and not just hunting predators, nothing beats locking them down. If I'm wrong, I'll likely learn that one day. I promise I'll come back here and eat my hat.

From a personal perspective, the only animals I've had trouble with are coyotes and hawks. I keep the gun at hand for the coyotes, but have never had to use it, I've heard squabbles twice in three years, and gone out to see a coyote in the yard, pacing my wire fence and eyeing the birds, and it ran away both times as soon as it saw me. How many times do you suppose a coyote has passed by and I wasn't around? I think probably more than just those two times. Never lost a single bird, and it is because of that fence, not the gun. For the hawks, my birds have shelter to get under and they do that well when they see a hawk (rooster says "garooo!" and they bolt, you've all probably heard the sound). One time, I heard my birds screaming and went out to find that a hawk landed on the ground and chased them under their shelter (frustrated by their successful escape) and then around the yard. Well, on the ground he must not have been as big of a threat, because nobody was harmed, and he flew away as soon as I came out. I started to consider that I might have to stop free ranging them in the day because of that, but he hasn't returned. I would never shoot at a hawk, not just because the government tells me I can't, but because I believe that they are telling me that because they are at risk of decline. It's really that simple. If they said, "Hey, they are recovered, do what you need to" that might be a different story, but I'd still look to other security measures first.

 

[janinepeters]

Tom e:

We're basically in agreement. But again, I'll point out that the world is a rapidly changing place, and what is abundant today could be in sharp decline tomorrow. We've learned that often enough. You're right - you alone could not possibly exterminate the raccoon, but there has to be a threshold. If everyone began shooting, trapping, and poisoning, we'd see a decline. Currently, the vast majority of people don't keep any livestock and don't intentionally kill any predators. But with the local foods movement and the backyard chicken craze (both of which I generally support), more and more folks are finding themselves in conflict with wildlife, and beginning to use lethal control. Throw in climate change, habitat conversion, human population growth, etc., and you've got an unstable situation and an uncertain future, even if many of our current activities do favor generalists, like the raccoon.

Take the house sparrow for example. Now I know it's not native to North America, and I don't want to start an argument about native vs. nonnative, "good" or "bad" species, I'm just using it as an example of an abundant species spiraling downward right under our noses. Historically, the species benefited enormously from human activity, but it's now in steep decline in many countries. Red listed in some countries, and on the endangered list in at least one. Why? Not totally clear, but it looks like a result of changes in human activity: Smooth, clean modern architecture means far fewer nesting sites around buildings, improved hygiene means less spilled grain and waste food available to adults, and pesticide use means less insect food for the young. Who ever have dreamed we could cause a decline in this "pest", without even trying? People around the world have tried to annihilate them in the past, and didn't even make a dent in the population!

I wouldn't depend on Fish and Wildlife to save all our species. We have to want them to persist. There are so many political issues, and some decisions are made to the detriment of certain species, especially those which come into conflict with people.

 

[RaeRae2]

You know - the other thing I should have specified more clearly....

If you lock your chickens up SECURELY so that predators never get a meal, they won't view your place as easy pickings to go back and tell all their family and friends about. Keep all your feed and your chickens securely locked up in truly predator proof enclosures. Animals that have to kill and eat to survive or that have to scrounge food to survive are not going to waste all their effort and resources on your farm IF they never get a meal there!

So you can shoot and shoot all day long, and kill 7 coons and 9 opossums and 3 fox every year, but I GUARANTEE you, there are 1,000 more coons, 400 more opossums, and 15 more fox just waiting for you to turn your back again. You will be battling predators forever. If just one fox is able to kill just one chicken, they will keep coming back to try for more. If you kill that fox, their denmates will have already been alerted to where the food source is, and they will start coming.

This is how I screwed myself over with hawks. For years I just kept thinking there was nothing I could do about the Red Tails killing my hens except just buy more hens. Two breeding pair raised their young several years in a row feeding on my chickens. The last chicken they ate was a few months ago. We now have the predator seecure run and chicken house established but the hawks are there every single day just waiting for a meal. Because they KNOW that for years, this place was a buffet. If they had never established that habit in the first place and taught their babies to eat my chickens, they might have moved on by now.

I think people are extremely mistaken if they think they can just keep killing predators to protect their chickens. I read posts all the time that people say if you free range chickens, expect losses. A flock of 20 hens, you can expect 3 or 4 deaths per year. EVERY time a predator picks off one of your birds, you are allowing them to establish taht pattern of "This is where I find food." They will keep coming back, even if they only get a meal once a month or once every 2 months. They will keep trying. But if they NEVER get a meal, or even get a taste of grain, or even get close to finding something to eat, I believe they are more likely to move on to more profitable areas.

Predators did not survive for millions of years by continuing to go back to the same dry watering hole and the same empty feeding grounds day after day until they starved and died. They move to where the food is. Take their food away. Problem solved.

I have a friend who lives literally right in the middle of the woods. Very dense, up north from here. She says there are coyotes, fox, wolves, and bear all around her but they never come on her farm. She has a flock of hens in a VERY secure predator proof run and house. It is literally Fort Knox. She's never had a break in in the years she's been there. These predators probably did snoop around a few times and figure out there was NO food here to be had. So they just moved on.

 

[RaeRae2]

I truly have zero desire to live that redneck lifestyle of a rootin' tootin' shootin' cowboy. I don't have a glock by my bed, and I feel no need or desire to protect me and mine with a firearm. There are laws and agencies and proper channels in place for me to utilize, should I need to. I have built a secure run to protect my flock, and running across the lawn at 5 a.m. with a shot gun to mow down a coon is a freak show I have zero desire to partake in. Sorry if that sounds crass, but that's just my opinion. I understand that everyone else does things THEIR own way, and I have NO problem with that. Just make sure that your stray bullets don't end up on my property. And yes I HAVE had this happen. Some redneck yahoos shooting up the place and aiming directly across my horse pasture, toward my barn. They thought it was hilarious to be chewing up the landscape and destroying the peace with "dem dar shot guns." I grew up in a hunting family and I knew how to fire different types of weapons by the time I was a teenager. I own a rifle and I love to shoot at targets. I was taught to reload shells and clean guns and spent many weekends at gun shows. I have no problems with firearms. But I DO have a problem with everybody thinking they're Billy the Kid and this the Wild Wild West. It's NOT.

I suppose it's a waste of time, but I still disagree that predators can reproduce faster than they can be done away with. One can shoot 3 or 4 coons in an evening, that will take months to be replaced by reproduction. Are you implying that if efforts had not been made to reduce coyote populations, that they would NOT have increased in population and range? If you are correct, then I say again that maybe we should encourage predators to kill our chickens so that they may in like manner increase their numbers. Sounds preposterous, don't it?

However, you all can go about protecting your chickens in your way, and I'll go on protecting mine in my way. As long as preds aren't getting the chicks, we're all succeeding. We often sleep with the doors unlocked, though I sleep with a Glock close to hand. I don't put it away, even when the doors ARE locked. Security is a well-rounded plan. Even though my chickens are in a pen, and spend the night in a predator-proof coop, I'll STILL shoot any predator that I see in the area. And if that in turn causes a drastic increase in predators, why I'll keep my shooting skills honed, I suppose.

 

[chickortreat]

.

 

[RaeRae2]

I am not a "rootin' tootin' shootin' cowboy". I am a rural American who enjoys hunting and shooting.

I live out in the country, not in town. The last time we had a burglary, the response time for the sheriff's department was a swift 45 minutes. I choose to trust myself with the duties of protecting me and mine. No doubt the "laws and agencies and proper channels" you speak of are why crime is so near non-existent in America. I wouldn't count on defending myself with a phone, even had 911 already been punched in.

Do what you please. But when you shoot and kill somebody with your hand gun stuffed in your night stand, I hope you have a GREAT criminal attorney. I too am a rural American who lives in the country. We have bear, wolves, fox, coyotes, even a mountain lion has moved into the area recently. And I will rely on the proper channels to handle emergencies, should they arrise. It truly scares me that so many citizens want to flash firearms at every little twig crack they hear in their back yard. Scary world we live in today.

When I was a kid, we had someone break in our house and was inside our basement as we sat in the kitchen eating dinner. Had no clue he was there until we heard something in the basement and saw a light flip off. A few seconds later we heard him walking up the steps which led to the kitchen. Definitely heavy boot steps coming up the stairs. My mother and I ran out the front door to the car. At that time we lived a good 50 minutes or so away from the nearest town out in rural Illinois. My mother was a big game hunter and our house was FULL of firearms. Some loaded for "personal protection." That's how I grew up!

But when the sheet hit the fan, and someone was actually IN our house, all my mom could think to do was escape. There was no time to run for a gun in the other room. The police came to the house and the basement was moderately vandalized but nothing was stolen. The back door was left wide open. Never found him.

You can "think" all you want that you will be the big tough guy with the gun that everybody is scared of and runs off your back porch, but when it really happens, there is no telling how the events will ACTUALLY unfold. What if my mom was able to grab a gun and point it at this guy? What then? What if HE had a gun and fired upon her? Or what if she panicked and shot and killed him, but he was unarmed? Depending on your state's dwelling laws, you could be headed to prision. At that moment it was better to just run. Escape the scene, and go for help. Let the authorities deal with it. My mom says she always thought she had guns to protect her property but when she really needed to protect her property, it just wasn't prudent or smart to try to go for a gun and actually protect her property. What made the most sense was grab the kid, grab the keys off the rack and run like hell for the escape route. Get in the car and go for help.

My belief is that the actual number of instances where one can effectively protect themselves with a firearm is extremely slim. Most cases will end up in a bloody, messy nightmare.

 

[Nslangton]

I am not a "rootin' tootin' shootin' cowboy". I am a rural American who enjoys hunting and shooting.

I live out in the country, not in town. The last time we had a burglary, the response time for the sheriff's department was a swift 45 minutes. I choose to trust myself with the duties of protecting me and mine. No doubt the "laws and agencies and proper channels" you speak of are why crime is so near non-existent in America. I wouldn't count on defending myself with a phone, even had 911 already been punched in.

Funny!!! My local police department advised me to buy my first handgun for this reason. They told us that the response time could be hours around here on the weekend and that we needed to be able to protect ourselves. As far as predators go, we built our coop and run really secure and don't let our birds free range due to a ridiculous amount of predators around here. If one managed to get my birds, it would not hesitate on shooting it. Just yesterday we had to do away with a few groundhogs that have been digging holes all over our horse pasture and eating my vegetables from the garden. I am not gonna allow a horse to break its leg so the groundhogs can live. Hopefully the others will get the idea and move out haha. Until then, they are gonna be feed for the turkey buzzards.