Contest Shut Down By Antis

[Just Lucky]

I personally have no use for coyotes. I am an opportunist when it comes to killing them, and to be honest I just assume they go die somewhere other than where they are shot. My hunting passion is whitetail.

I think when it comes to any area with predators, the more predators there are the more alert the whitetail population becomes which reduces opportunities to harvest deer.

I do know a few guys who enjoy hunting coyotes and could care less about whitetail and that is ok too. Especially since they're my neighbors so it works out for both of us.

I say good luck to anyone who is in a hunting contest and I would love to see the pictures of your kills.

 

[Rattler]

Some people seem to be saying since there is no way the coyote population can ever be eradicated, we should do nothing and just accept the consequences.

That's a fatalist attitude.

The proposals that make sense call for effective population management to keep their numbers down.

Without such population control, yotes become the dominant wildlife species in a given area, depleting the population of other animals to minimal amounts, before moving on to better feeding grounds, leaving behind land that has little wildlife of value.

I have posted 3 different articles in this thread on wildlife research and coyote behavior to support this hypothesis.  It's quite obvious some others here haven't taken any time to read them.  Yet they clamor for "scientific data" and "research".  

No one is more blind than those who refuse to see.

Trapping yotes is probably more effective, yes.  So why didn't hunters back trappers when they were under heavy attack by the anti's to the point many simply gave up trapping?  If there is one group the anti's hate more than hunters, it's trappers.

Nobody expects these coyote contests to solve the yote problem, but they go a long way to keeping the problem in mind, keeping desire to hunt predators up, and reminding hunters their hunting future requires a little work, dedication and a united front.  Letting the anti's stop these hunts is giving them the keys to stopping all hunts.  Personally, I have no intention of allowing the anti's to decide the future of hunting in America without a knock down, drag out fight.  I just cannot accept proclamations it is a fight we cannot win, or one not worth fighting.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Rattler

[Five Seasons]

On 2/1/2020 at 12:59 AM, Rattler said:

Just goes to prove the state of denial you guys are in.  What do you know about Delaware County, NY?  Ever been here?  What do you think yotes eat the most this time of the year?  Here's a hint: Fast food.

I live here and this story is not fabricated.  We have yotes.  Lots of them!  Want to hunt them?  This is the place to do it.  I must've hit a half dozen yotes with my truck in the last decade and have seen many deer run in front of vehicles while being chased at night by yotes.  The volunteer FD I belong to responds to all of these MVA's so we have records of it.  Why the heck do you think a FD in this county sponsored a yote hunt?

I have no fear of these yotes.  I have simply lost all tolerance for them and shoot as many of them as I can.  I hunt alone, in the dark and want to see them as close as I can get to them.  I do not have the slightest fear they are going to do anything to me.  They have the fear based on what I do to them.

You guys really will never understand anything about yotes because you simply refuse to accept anything that doesn't fall in line with your warm and fuzzy narrative.  Like the saying goes: Ignorance is bliss.

Nobody is really in denial Rattler, in fact I haven't seen much of, if any at all where some member of this forum came out against the tournament. 

We have members here who don't deer hunt. Doesn't meant they don't support deer hunters. We have members who don't duck hunt. Doesn't mean they don't support duck hunters. We have members here who hunt for all sorts of reasons and maybe tournaments aren't their thing. Doesn't mean they're against coyote hunting or tournaments. But that's what started the fuss.

I don't oppose you spending every waking minute of your life pursuing these dogs. I'm not against you. I don't think Chris is against you either. I would even like to see an open season on them.

Somehow this thread went from a bunch of us being annoyed at anti-hunters, to another member calling out the rest of us hunters, to a made-up argument that coyotes are bad. When in fact the later part was only meant to educate you and others that you need to phrase your approach and reasoning behind the coyote hunt differently and that science does not support your reasoning for a war. Even in the video you posted it explains how they coyotes moved in once the wolf was eradicated. Doesn't that in and of itself tell you something about the incredibly cunning abilities of this animal? Which in the very least, would be nice to at least respect as you pursue it?

[left field]

32 minutes ago, Belo said:

Even in the video you posted it explains how they coyotes moved in once the wolf was eradicated. Doesn't that in and of itself tell you something about the incredibly cunning abilities of this animal? Which in the very least, would be nice to at least respect as you pursue it?

Does that suggest that there's a need for an apex predator? Eradicate one and "the force of nature" will act in such a way as to put another in its place.  

I've just started the podcast and found it interesting that the hosts bring up all the same issues that have been discussed here for the past few days.

Edited February 3, 2020 by left field

[Rattler]

The problem I see, and what I'm trying to point out here, is the difference between the Eastern Coyotes we deal with in the contest area, as opposed to the smaller western coyote, and scientific studies relating to it, being used to eliminate the contest in Hancock.

We are applying the wrong data stream to the problem.  None of that data applies to the Eastern Coyote, the way it hunts, the problems it creates or the management plan required to control it's population.  The two animals are different.  Using western coyote research to attack the Hancock contest is applying apple issues to an orange grove problem.

When the correct research data is evaluated against the contest goals, I think it is clear it works as a population management tool to the benefit of all other wildlife in the area.  Until people start refuting why I'm saying with research specifically done on the Eastern Coyote, I will continue to argue they are using the wrong data stream to defend eliminating the contest.

My frustration comes from not being able to get anyone to understand this.

[left field]

 PA has done a number of studies on the coyotes effect on deer populations.  

Quote

Three years of field study, 165 captured fawns and more than 200,000 trail-camera photos again have demonstrated that Pennsylvania has good, stable fawn survival.

The research, which wrapped up in 2017, was started to see if predators – particularly coyotes – were taking more fawns than documented in a two-year study that began in 2000. The Game Commission and Pennsylvania Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at Penn State (PCFWRU) collaborated to design the study and conduct fieldwork.

Although the playing field had changed in the study areas when the second study began in 2015 – Pennsylvania had more predators and deer –  the results essentially were the same, according to Christopher Rosenberry, who supervises the agency’s Deer and Elk Section.

“There was no evidence that predators were taking too many of our fawns in any of our 23 Wildlife Management Units,” Rosenberry said. “They all have stable or growing whitetail populations.”

“Our field studies have shown repeatedly that predators are the No. 1 cause of fawn mortality, and more often than not, black bears are taking the fawns,” Rosenberry said. “But fawn mortality is not causing deer-population reductions anywhere in Pennsylvania.”

Looks like there's room for hunters and predators.

Edited February 4, 2020 by left field

[left field]

Not trying to belabour the point but this write up on a study of eastern coyotes effect on deer just popped into my inbox. 

https://www.themeateater.com/conservation/wildlife-management/study-eastern-whitetails-thrive-despite-coyote-invasion?utm_source=MeatEater Subscribers&utm_campaign=9cd22215a2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_02_05_08_29&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e4b2ec63b4-9cd22215a2-67598257&mc_cid=9cd22215a2&mc_eid=42a95e6647

The pull quote:

Quote

According to this research, however, hunters can breathe easier. In the big picture, deer can handle—even thrive—under new pressure from coyotes. The study, “Effects in White-Tailed Deer Following Easter Coyote Colonization,” was published in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 2019.

Quote

ABSTRACT

The expansion or recovery of predators can affect local prey populations. Since the 1940s, coyotes (Canis latrans) have expanded into eastern North America where they are now the largest predator and prey on white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). However, their effect on deer populations remains controversial. We tested the hypothesis that coyotes, as a novel predator, would affect deer population dynamics across large spatial scales, and the strongest effects would occur after a time lag following initial coyote colonization that allows for the predator populations to grow. We evaluated deer population trends from 1981 to 2014 in 384 counties of 6 eastern states in the United States with linear mixed models. We included deer harvest data as a proxy for deer relative abundance, years since coyote arrival in a county as a proxy of coyote abundance, and landscape and climate covariates to account for environmental effects. Overall, deer populations in all states experienced positive population growth following coyote arrival. Time since coyote arrival was not a significant predictor in any deer population models and our results indicate that coyotes are not controlling deer populations at a large spatial scale in eastern North America. 

Thanks for making me look closer at an issue I knew little about.

 

 

[Rattler]

This is the part of the study they need to expand on.  This is the problem in my area.

"And several small-scale studies have shown that coyote predation can push down local deer populations."

The article then drifts into the "Big Picture" watering down of the local numbers.

"In the big picture, deer can handle—even thrive—under new pressure from coyotes."

Saying "can handle" is a way of saying they will maintain a survivable level.  Saying, "even thrive" indicates a possibility, but not necesssarily a reality.

The study also included only two northern states where the Eastern coyote grows to it's heaviest, NY & NJ.  That will tend to skew the numbers as well.

I can attest to the fact this statement is completely wrong in my area and makes me wonder who this reseacher is and if she is credible.

“Basically, coyotes mostly leave adult females alone and adult females are the most important cohort of the population when it comes to reproduction,” said the lead author, Eugenia Bragina, now with the Wildlife Conservation Society.

Wildlife Conservation Society?  I suspect bias here.

“Because we detected no signal for eastern coyotes causing a decline in whitetail deer over time, our results imply that coyote removal would have little effect on increasing deer numbers in this region. Although coyote control could impact local deer dynamics for a short period of time in some situations, we do not expect coyote removal would be able to increase deer population size at a large spatial scale.”

How much coyote removal was already going on at the time?  They see no "decline" but don't consider the lack of increase here.  Again, a mention that local control "could" have a positive effect, immediately minimized with global variables that don't seem to have been considered in the case being made to leave coyotes be.

A lot of "research" today is funded by groups that want a desired result at the end.  This was funded by the Wildlife Society.  This is a link to their website.  https://wildlife.org/  They are far from a pro hunting group.  They are very much a pro wildlife group.  I remain skeptical.

[Five Seasons]

On 2/4/2020 at 4:12 PM, left field said:

 PA has done a number of studies on the coyotes effect on deer populations.  

Looks like there's room for hunters and predators.

hey you get out of here with your science! I know what I see in my backyard and these vermin need extermination!!!

[left field]

Damn.

You argued that all the studies were for western coyotes and not applicable here so I provided one that only dealt with eastern coyotes in relation to deer populations that showed no decrease in overall deer population, but that's not good enough because ... reasons. Or at least because that's not how you see things in your tiny little corner of Delaware County. 

So then you go on to question the researchers and the funding org as their name is highly suspect. Let's see what these ponytailed, lefty, anti, liberal, quiche-eating radical hippies have to say on hunting.

Quote

Standing Position:

Hunting co-evolved with the needs and cultures of humankind. Archaeological and historical evidence indicates that earlier cultures hunted and relied on wild animals for subsistence and some cultures continue to depend on wildlife for both partial and primary subsistence. As skills in animal husbandry and agriculture were acquired, dependence on hunting for subsistence decreased in most North American cultures. Today hunting has many social values, including recreation, subsistence, heritage, utilization of the harvestable surplus to benefit people, and control of overabundant wildlife populations. Sociologists have documented that hunting provides deep, central life meanings for many participants and their families and, in many cases, core identities to social, conservation, and cultural groups throughout the world. Among themes that have been identified are a historical connection to a time they value, an honest relationship with nature, and pursuit of the ideal of self-reliance. Further, hunting often elicits a deep passion among participants that transcends gender, race, and socioeconomic class. Additionally, outdoor pursuits such as hunting help teach valuable lessons in ethics and responsibility and help participants develop a conservation and land ethic. These important values often extend beyond participants to families, friends, and acquaintances. A hunter's deep personal interest in wildlife resources has provided the keystone to modern wildlife management, the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The sales of hunting and fishing licenses, stamps, permits, and the U.S. federal excise tax or other taxes on firearms and ammunition paid by the hunting and shooting public has provided the most important continuing funding source for wildlife research and for acquisition and management of public lands for wildlife. Hunters and shooters have directly and indirectly financed many major programs in wildlife conservation, benefitting both game and non-game species. Most wild animals produce sufficient young to create populations greater than their habitats can support. Mortality factors, such as natural death, hunting, and other human caused mortality like vehicle collisions, usually act to regulate population numbers so they align with the limits of the habitat. If this did not occur, growing populations would degrade their habitat, which would lower the capacity of the land to support healthy populations and could affect habitat for other species. Professional wildlife biologists are charged with the responsibility of managing wildlife populations in a scientific, sustainable, and socially acceptable manner. Hunting, when based on biological information and properly regulated, can be used effectively to help meet this responsibility. In addition, hunting regulated through licenses, stamps, permits, and taxes provides the major source of financing for habitat acquisition and improvement, research, and management programs for all wildlife, both game and non-game.

The policy of The Wildlife Society in regard to hunting is to:

1. Endorse the principle that hunting, when properly regulated following biological principles, is an appropriate means of managing wildlife populations.

2. Encourage decision makers to weigh the biological, societal, cultural, and economic considerations when making decisions on hunting and the welfare of wildlife.

3. Encourage hunter education programs that allow hunters to increase their knowledge of wildlife ecology and management and to emphasize hunter ethics and responsibilities.

4. Support greater education of the public about the biological, ecological, cultural, and economic necessity of regulated hunting to the conservation and integrity of natural resources.

5. Support access management that provides for appropriate opportunities for hunting and other compatible uses in a manner consistent with the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

Seriously, dude. 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Interesting article was in my inbox from yesterday from QDMA

https://www.qdma.com/how-much-venison-are-coyotes-eating/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-02-06

 

 

 

[moog5050]

11 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Interesting article was in my inbox from yesterday from QDMA

https://www.qdma.com/how-much-venison-are-coyotes-eating/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-02-06

 

 

 

Wow.  Higher percentage of a venison diet generally than I would think.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Interesting article was in my inbox from yesterday from QDMA
https://www.qdma.com/how-much-venison-are-coyotes-eating/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-02-06
 
 
 

Would like to see a real updated study done in an area say like ours that have a real four season years. I would bet they would dispute this study a lot. Of course our hunting season being long would put deer on their table for many months because of poor hunters but I would bet deer would be a very steady line across the study in areas that have real winter’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rattler]

1 hour ago, left field said:

Damn.

You argued that all the studies were for western coyotes and not applicable here so I provided one that only dealt with eastern coyotes in relation to deer populations that showed no decrease in overall deer population, but that's not good enough because ... reasons. Or at least because that's not how you see things in your tiny little corner of Delaware County. 

So then you go on to question the researchers and the funding org as their name is highly suspect. Let's see what these ponytailed, lefty, anti, liberal, quiche-eating radical hippies have to say on hunting.

Seriously, dude. 

 

I see a lot of demand for regulation and restriction of hunting based on "research" in their statement.  A lot of verbage there, that need not be there, without a desire to control hunting in line with their research.  That explains the research.  Maybe because I've seen it before, but I can read between the lines and know what is being said with double speak.  You trust them if you want to.  I think healthy skepticism is needed whenever the government's purposes are beneficient.

Like I said, too much of what I see in their "research" does not apply to what is going on in the field.  Maybe those "local" areas they mention are not as small as they would have you believe.  I sure as heck don't see them saying coyotes are helping to increase deer populations, though I bet they would love to say that if they could figure a way to do it.

With more of my fellow local hunters failing to fill a deer tag every season, I'm skeptical.  I look forward to a research counter point, if one is ever allowed to be publicly circulated wihout restriction.  I know, I'm crazy, like any type of research has never been censored in this country.  Power and control people, power and control.

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, left field said:

Damn.

You argued that all the studies were for western coyotes and not applicable here so I provided one that only dealt with eastern coyotes in relation to deer populations that showed no decrease in overall deer population, but that's not good enough because ... reasons. Or at least because that's not how you see things in your tiny little corner of Delaware County. 

So then you go on to question the researchers and the funding org as their name is highly suspect. Let's see what these ponytailed, lefty, anti, liberal, quiche-eating radical hippies have to say on hunting.

Seriously, dude. 

 

that's a very well though out statement, a little lengthy for the average american to read so they could tidy it up, but otherwise one of the best summaries i've seen. 

[Five Seasons]

24 minutes ago, Rattler said:

I see a lot of demand for regulation and restriction of hunting based on "research" in their statement.  A lot of verbage there, that need not be there, without a desire to control hunting in line with their research.  That explains the research.  Maybe because I've seen it before, but I can read between the lines and know what is being said with double speak.  You trust them if you want to.  I think healthy skepticism is needed whenever the government's purposes are beneficient.

Like I said, too much of what I see in their "research" does not apply to what is going on in the field.  Maybe those "local" areas they mention are not as small as they would have you believe.  I sure as heck don't see them saying coyotes are helping to increase deer populations, though I bet they would love to say that if they could figure a way to do it.

With more of my fellow local hunters failing to fill a deer tag every season, I'm skeptical.  I look forward to a research counter point, if one is ever allowed to be publicly circulated wihout restriction.  I know, I'm crazy, like any type of research has never been censored in this country.  Power and control people, power and control.

nah man. you've just got your head in the sand on this one. Your track record on this site is ripe with conspiracy theories and opinions, so we shouldn't be shocked that you're trying to read between the lines for something that isn't there.

Hunting should be regulated. Unregulated hunting is what caused so many problems in the past. I wish people would be responsible and we didn't need regulations, but people are not.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, Four Season Whitetail's said:

Would like to see a real updated study done in an area say like ours that have a real four season years. I would bet they would dispute this study a lot. Of course our hunting season being long would put deer on their table for many months because of poor hunters but I would bet deer would be a very steady line across the study in areas that have real winter’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was the number 1 food in this study

[left field]

58 minutes ago, Rattler said:

I see a lot of demand for regulation and restriction of hunting based on "research" in their statement.  A lot of verbage there, that need not be there, without a desire to control hunting in line with their research.  That explains the research.  Maybe because I've seen it before, but I can read between the lines and know what is being said with double speak.  You trust them if you want to.  I think healthy skepticism is needed whenever the government's purposes are beneficient.

Like I said, too much of what I see in their "research" does not apply to what is going on in the field.  Maybe those "local" areas they mention are not as small as they would have you believe.  I sure as heck don't see them saying coyotes are helping to increase deer populations, though I bet they would love to say that if they could figure a way to do it.

With more of my fellow local hunters failing to fill a deer tag every season, I'm skeptical.  I look forward to a research counter point, if one is ever allowed to be publicly circulated wihout restriction.  I know, I'm crazy, like any type of research has never been censored in this country.  Power and control people, power and control.

Did you read the study itself? The study from this private organization?

So now, not only are you able to determine that the researchers are wrong based on your experience in your tiny corner of the country, you have, in fact, cleverly discerned their real intent by reading between the lines of their official pro-hunting position.

You do know that the key word in healthy skepticism is healthy.

 

[chrisw]

Wow.  Higher percentage of a venison diet generally than I would think.

I'm sure roadkill and natural causes killed deer also account for a portion of that, how much who knows?

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[chrisw]

Rattler, do you honestly think that just your tiny little piece of the US has "different" coyotes than ANYONE else?? Come on man, let it go.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Curmudgeon]

I'm assuming Rattled is in the area dominated by closed canopy forests, not the more agricultural parts. I have a farmer friend in Delaware County who has too many deer and gets DMAP tags. 

Like the Adirondack Forest Preserve, the maturation of Catskill forests occured during my hunting lifetime. They matured enough in that time to change the habitat negatively for deer. Hunting the central Dacks - Pidgeon Lake and Five Ponds Wilderness Areas - in the late 70s and 80s, we saw deer most days. Now, you are lucky if you see one during a week of hunting.

Coyotes? Probably not the main reason. Coyotes moved in 40 years before I hunted there. Do they kill deer? Sure, especially in deep snow. But blaming coyotes for low deer numbers in declining deer habitat is a classic correlation vs causation problem. 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

It was the number 1 food in this study

Yeah I’m sure it is the Whitetails are the top food in any area that has Whitetails but I would guess our line would be a pretty steady line for most of our year with us having long hunting seasons and long winters. Prob start dropping in July until September and then start leveling off again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rattler]

11 hours ago, chrisw said:

Rattler, do you honestly think that just your tiny little piece of the US has "different" coyotes than ANYONE else?? Come on man, let it go.

If you guys would be so kind as to tolerate a little doubt in research, I would appreciate it.  Research is a form of theory.  You do it and publish your findings.  You publish your findings so it can be peer reviewed.  Peer review can support or reject your research based on many factors, from methodology to conclusions.  

I'm just questioning parts of the article that appear to be incorrect, and I've stated why I believe they are.  Researchers have raised concerns that ideological homogeneity may lead to questionable research practices.  This concern is grounded in research on confirmation bias, group polarization, motivated reasoning, and the tendency for these phenomena to be even more pronounced among the highly educated.  It is much more prevalent today than it has ever been.

So I'm saying I'm not buying it right now.  Time will tell if it's correct or flawed.  We shall see.

As to the habitat where I live, it's mixed hardwood and farmland.  We hunt both areas.  Anyone who owns 50 or more acres can get DMP's.  The question is, how many go unfilled?  Deer and turkey numbers are definitely down and yote sightings and harvests are certainly up.  Seems to be a cause and effect relationship to me, but some would argue.  That's OK.  Time will tell.  If they're right, it won't matter.  If I'm right, it will.  I hope I'm not right.

Edited February 7, 2020 by Rattler

[Rattler]

And the hits just keep on coming......

https://riverreporter.com/stories/white-sulphur-springs-coyote-hunt-a-go,35670?fbclid=IwAR29oWycBHseNwQ34QB8m6TFNRAPgjuSxo1bPPNMC7U-_MeFRsgVhWbYuGs

[diplomat019]

Ahh hancock ny.  The home of the infamous islamberg and the jihadi bike ride that was flooded with patriots.  When thousands of patriots can flood the streets and cant shut down a jihadi training complex but a few twitter fingers can cancel a coyote hunt.