Relocate or Retaliate?

[fullhouse]

We have racoons. We also have 3 really big dogs, including a bulldog that decided his job in life is to guard the chickens. We don't even get them in the trash anymore. I never see them or their tracks. I do get deer and bunnies, but no racoons. The dogs don't allow them in their space.

 

[Mahonri]

I can't imagine there ever being a shortage of racoons. They are worse than rabbits.

I love the three S's. (shoot, shovel and shut up)

How about?? (Trap) Secure and Send to the other side.... Silence.

 

[midget_farms]

I like the guard dog idea. My dogs of course like chicken as much as the next guy, which is why I have them penned (the chickens that is). I assume you guys leave your dogs outside. My dogs wouldn't know what to do if they couldn't sleep in a bed.

 

[PurpleChicken]

Quote:
Our dogs are inside dogs too. It's just the scent and activity that does the trick for
us.

 

[SassyCatHill]

Quote:
As I take a LONGGGGGGGGG deep breath to prepare for the beating I am about to take. There is no shortage of humans in the world either. I believe in either trying to relocate or finding a way to live in harmony with the wildlife around you. There will NEVER be a time you eliminate all predators from your area. They will always come back. Rather than kill every living thing in sight, I beleive in a secure chickie haven and peaceful co-existence.

I love you for saying this!

 

[patandchickens]

I believe that probably the study being referred to (although there may be others as well) is

Rosatte, R.C. and MacInnes, C., 1989. Relocation of city raccoons. Ninth Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings: USDA Forest Service General Technical Report: Great Plains Agricultural Council, 87-92.

I have not read it myself. It is cited in quite a lot of places as having consisted of relocating (dunno the number of) radiotagged raccoons from Toronto to areas to the north (probably around where I am, in fact), and they say that 60% of the relocated individuals were dead within, IIRC, six months.

An additional concern is that relocation of trapped animals contributes to the speed with which disease spreads. This includes, though is not limited to, rabies.

Also it is usually fairly pointless from the property owner's point of view. There are a roughly infinite number of raccoons or most other common predators out there. Removing (or killing, either) the ones that visit your property just means that others will move in tomorrow or next week. The only point I can see in getting rid of a predator is if a *particular* predator has become unusually intent on breaching your defenses. In that case you may get some benefit. Otherwise you are just on a treadmill of perpetual removal.

If you are *going* to try to get rid of predators, though, personally I think that a bullet through the head is much much more humane than releasing them to mess up *other* animals' lives and most likely die an unpleasant fast-or-slow death in an unfamiliar place with hostile neighbors.

Seems to me prevention is better, even if the cost requires extra scrounging or cancelling cable or forgoing soda pop and pizzas for a few months or whatever. It really IS possible to build pretty much predator-proof coops and runs (well, if you have seriously chicken-loving bears, it may not be economically feasible, but I mean, other than that).

JMO,

Pat

 

[pkeeler]

Don't get me wrong -- I agree with the viewpoint of the page you linked to. I just think it's a good idea to recognize the difference between fact and claim.

I agree. I had seen the study name on another page but I can't find it again. I guess their advertising contract with Google ran out

PatandChickens has the study and it is possible the number got transposed. There have probably been other studies. It could be that in the study, 60% were confirmed killed, 30% weren't recovered. Either way, we all agree relocation is not an answer.​

 

[ivan3]

Every location and situation is different. In some locations relocation is successful with high % survival rates, in others they don't do as well. Management of any predator at a specific location actually requires observation and leg work. Research is good and will allow one an idea of where to be looking and, in general, indicates what will be the least onerous option, but it is no substitute for direct observation and reflection.

Just google: relocation and survival rates procyon lotor

 

[coffeelady3]

Quote:
Come now panner, you know a thing or two about trapping and relocating predators....to the local jail!

 

[amazondoc]

Quote:
Ahhh, thanks for the citation. I'll check it out when I get a moment.

At this point, though, one would also have to survey a parallel population that was NOT relocated, to compare mortality rates. Mortality in any wild population is likely to be pretty high, with or without relocation.

An additional concern is that relocation of trapped animals contributes to the speed with which disease spreads. This includes, though is not limited to, rabies.

Absolutely. This also applies to shooting predators, though. Anything which increases immigration and emigration will contribute to disease spread, whether it involves physically moving the animals or killing animals followed by other animals moving into the emptied territory.

Also it is usually fairly pointless from the property owner's point of view. There are a roughly infinite number of raccoons or most other common predators out there. Removing (or killing, either) the ones that visit your property just means that others will move in tomorrow or next week.

Right!!

If you are *going* to try to get rid of predators, though, personally I think that a bullet through the head is much much more humane than releasing them to mess up *other* animals' lives and most likely die an unpleasant fast-or-slow death in an unfamiliar place with hostile neighbors.

Well.....life in the wild is likely to end unpleasantly even for animals that never meet a human being, so I'm not so sure where the "humane" balance lies here. I personally would be much more likely to relocate than to shoot, but I agree with you 100% that prevention/exclusion strategies are much preferable to either relocation or shooting.​