View Full Version : Jaguars? in America? YES

April 23, 2001, 09:20 PM
Saw a neat show about the American Jaguar on Outdoor network last night. I thought they were extinct except for an old film reel i had seen by marty stouffer who had photographed it near tuscon.. well old Marty got in trouble for staging wildlife fights so I figure that too was staged.. and then hello.

Apparently in 1999 a guy who trains his dogs to hunt mountain lions treed himself a BIG spotted jaguar it was on videotape. Another backpacker photographed one in southern AZ the same year with a still camera. Apparently them come up into AZ and NM from Mexico and stay mostly in the mountains. There haven't been enough of them to hunt in years and years and they aren't sure if we have a viable breeding population.. but could you imagine.. heading out on your favorite deer hunt at 4 am in pre dawn.. and seeing an orange and black spotted cat lurking around your favorite meadow?? Jaguars are the3rd largest cat on earth, being heavier and more muscled than a leopard and can easily kill large game. PS the show mentioned that NO black jaguars have ever been seen North of the Yucatan in Mexico. Kind of makes me want to go 'camera hunting' in Apache country.

April 23, 2001, 09:34 PM
Yes, I read about a guy treeing one while mountain lion hunting. I looked into it and donated a little money to their preservation and conservation.

April 24, 2001, 02:20 PM
Ironically, the F&G dept here in Arizona denies that they exist. As a result, it is perfectly legal to hunt them. :D

Wouldn't the local taxidermist just crap his drawers if you strolled in with a jaguar pelt and asked for a full body mount??

Dave R
April 24, 2001, 03:42 PM
Wow, that is too cool! I hope hunters will let them esablish a little better population, before they do something legal but unwise.

Maybe each AZ hunter should sacrifice a kill to the Jaguars in the coming season...

April 24, 2001, 04:13 PM
check out this months NGM
There is a picture of a guy standing where he took a jaguar picture in USA

heres the website:

i edited the video tape for the Jaguar tracking pieces


Paul B.
April 25, 2001, 11:36 AM
Mad Dog. From page 41 of the Arizona 2000-2001 Hunting regulations.

Attention Mountain Lion Hunters!

Jaguars are listed as endangered in the U.S. under the Endangered Species Act. If, when using dogs to tree mountain lions, a jaguar is inadvertantly chased and/or treed, the dogs must be called off the trail upon realization that a jaguar is being chased.
It goes on to state that if you see someone killing a jaguar, you can call 1-800-352-0700 to report it. You can get a $5,000 reward.

Looks like you can't shoot a jaguar in Arizona. I wonder if that counts if "Brer Jag" is trying to have you for lunch. Then who is the endangered species? Oh! That's right, we humans don't count. Franly, ending up as "cat scat" just does not float my boat, but just don't think that shooting jaguars in Arizona is legal because the state doesn't list them. You could end up in deep do-do.
Paul B.

April 26, 2001, 10:52 AM
Growing up hunting in South Texas, I have never seen a jaguar, but have seen coatimundi, ocelot and jagarundi. More interesting critters make it up from Mexico than most people realize.


April 26, 2001, 04:27 PM
Too bad so many of them are two legged...

Thanks for the heads up on the hunting regs, I don't believe thay said that in the last edition I read.
I guess the tree hugger cops are getting wise.
Anybody know where I can sell a rare, spotted cougar pelt??

Dave R
April 26, 2001, 05:41 PM
This is another reason I'm a "little miffed" with the eco-Nazis.

The Feds want to "re-introduce" wolves to Idaho. Guess what. There is a significant body of evidence that the wolves are ALREADY HERE. But the do-gooders won't acknowledge it.

They also want to "re-introduce" Grizzly to Idaho. Likewise, there is some anecdotal evidence that they are ALREADY HERE.

The brother of a good friend (OK, a 3rd-hand story, but a reliable source) was in the mountains NE of Yellow Pine scouting for a spot for our annual Scout "high adventure". He spotted a brown (colored) bear that looked suspicious. He was unable to get closer than about 100 yds, but had the bear in his binoculars for a significant amount of time. He describes dished face, high front shoulder, definitely higher than the rear shoulder...

He reported to Fish & Game, who said "could be" but no one else takes him seriously.

Glad it wasn't me in the "Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness" (I am not making up that name) with Griz in the glass and nothing on my hip.

Sounds like AZ at least acknowledges that the Jaguar is there.

Art Eatman
April 26, 2001, 08:56 PM
There are grizzlies in Glacier Park; who ever explained political boundaries to a bear? What would keep them out of Idaho?

Mexico began seriously enforcing their "no bear hunting" laws around 1984. So, black bears started showing up in Big Bend National Park a year or three later. Then, on up to Alpine and Fort Davis. And in the Big Bend Ranch State Park, as well as the dumpsters around Ghost Town. I've seen tracks and scat of bear around my back country hunt camp, as well as on my wife's land down near the highway.

Dunno what a jaguar would eat around here; the datgummed mountain lions already ate it! :D We're bum-deep in lion poop, but the Sierra Clubbers keep trying to say they're "endangered". Trouble is, Sierra Clubbers ain't endangered--however...

But like us People Eating Tasty Animals say, "Shoot, shovel and shut up!"

:), Art

April 27, 2001, 10:49 AM
A little additional to my previous post. I was hoping to lay hands on the material I received about this, but haven't had time to look for it. I originally read about the Jaguars on a hunting web site. They listed an address where a group was doing statistical and preservation work on them and I wrote for the info. I recieved an 8 1/2" x 11" manilla envelope full of info. This was not a tree hugger organization. If I can find the link I will post it.

Keith Rogan
April 27, 2001, 11:33 AM
Bears, big cats, etc, are dangerous at times but why wouldn't you want them around?

Are you guys only comfortable hunting in a park-like atmosphere where every possible hazard has been removed? I wouldn't want to hunt where you couldn't find a grizzly track or hear some wolves singing at night.

Art Eatman
April 27, 2001, 10:01 PM
Dunno 'bout the rest of the world, Keith, but I'm happy as a bug to have cats and bears around. We got a few too many cats for the good of the deer herd, but that's the way it goes.

Always been a shortage of wolves and Ol' Griz down in this part of the world. Of course, in a desert, there's not a high density of anything. Well, bugs and such.

:), Art

Keith Rogan
April 28, 2001, 03:57 PM

Ditto, my friend! I'm sure an excess of predators does cut the bag limit of deer, elk, etc, to some degree. But in most places (obviously, not your neck of the woods), it's winterkill, not predators that sets the maximum carrying capacity.
People spend tens of thousands of dollars to hunt in Alaska or Africa and only partially to pursue new game species. A big part of that desire is to hunt in a truly natural environment where you have a chance (a very small chance), of becoming part of the food chain - that's exciting and adds a quality to the experience that nothing else can.

But when grizzlies or big cats come into an area, either naturally or through reintroduction, a certain element will resist this.

Now, I understand perfectly why a rancher wouldn't want them since it affects his livelihood but I truly do NOT understand hunters who don't want wolves, cats, grizzlies in an area. One can hope that if these predators take hold that you'll have new and exciting animals to hunt, in the meantime you're at least hunting in an area with at least a small element of excitement and danger.

I see it as "quality" hunting, I don't know how others view it.

Jay Baker
April 28, 2001, 09:40 PM
Dave R-- I have no doubt your cousin saw a Griz, per his description.. and location. When my buddy and I were hunting elk, north of the Clearwater in North Idaho (Mallard-Larkin area), we saw some 13" tracks and a large broken, standing tree trunk, with heavy, deep claw marks so high I could not stand on tip toe and reach them. I'm 6'2", and wear a 36" sleeve. I do not think that was a black bear tree. The outfitter we were with said they were in there, too.

Two years ago, we were elk/deer hunting in Area 62, in East Idaho, camped about 3/4 miles south of Yellowstone, and about 1/2 mile west of the Wyoming border. A ranger came into our camp and told us to be careful as a Griz had torn up a hunters' camp a few days before, about 1/4 mile from where we were camped. We didn't see any Griz, but again, saw some 13"/14" tracks in fresh mud.

I have a good friend who lives 50 miles north of Boise, in Garden Valley. He's heard wolves howling there... and he definitely knows the difference between wolves and coyotes.

Yeah, they're a few Griz and wolves around Idaho. J.B.

Dave R
April 28, 2001, 10:45 PM
Keith, just to be clear, I have no objection to wolves & griz doing what they do. I just object to wasting money to do something that's either already done, or will happen by itself if you just let it be.

Keith Rogan
April 29, 2001, 01:45 PM
Dave R.,

I wasn't bashing anyone in particular, just the general sense I get that many hunters oppose big predators coming back to the Rockies.

As for posts about grizzly tracks in Idaho, it's difficult to distinguish by size alone whether a track is a black or grizzly - blacks in good country can get surpisingly big.

The way to tell is by the length of the claw marks. Grizzly claw marks will extend 3-5" beyond the toe pad, while black bear claws are only an inch or less in length.

Also, the length of the track is not very helpful to guage size anyway, you want to find the front tracks (the rounder, more dog-like tracks) and measure the width. The rule of thumb on grizzlies is that the number of inches, "plus 1" will give you a rough estimate of the square foot of the hide.
Ie: a front track 7 inches in width equates to an 8 foot bear, etc.
I'm not sure if that equation works on black bears.

May 1, 2001, 07:49 PM
Healthy predators are a sign of a healthy deer/elk herd. I for one hope the Jaguar makes it back.

And while we are at it.. we could all stop worrying about mad cow if we were eating Buffalo.

Big cats make me smile, as do wolves and bears.

Note to you all: Grizz and wolves are extinct in Colorado, but not in Wyoming. I know I've seen wolf tracks in area 8 in Colorado, and in the 80's someone killed a female grizz in the San Juans, and recently a Grizz was spotted in Breckenridge.

hunt/hike safe and enjoy the view.

Art Eatman
May 1, 2001, 09:03 PM
There has, historically, been a mama mountain lion on Cigar Mountain, about 3/4 mile south of my house. Right now, she has a half-grown cub still hanging around, and through February until a couple of weeks back, a "handsome stranger" with big, fat feet was apparently courting her.

They like bread, soaked in bacon grease. :D They'd rather walk on a recently bulldozed sendero in sandy soil, than out in the rocks and sticker burrs and cactus and such...

As usual,


Jay Baker
May 1, 2001, 09:41 PM
Keith, we didn't measure the width of the "Griz" tracks we saw in Idaho, but they definitely had the exceptionally long claw marks in front.

I've seen lots of black bear tracks in Calif., Idaho, Colo., Utah, Wyom., and Mont., and these Idaho "Griz" tracks were unlike any black bear tracks I've ever seen. Much larger with the long claw marks. According to the Id. F&G, a black bear going over 300 pounds in Idaho, is rare. Several years ago, I killed a 400 pound black bear in Calif., at least, that's what the two guides I was with, said. The hide squared at 6'2" and the skull which is on my desk as I write, was 19 1/2 inches. As you said, the pads indicate the square of the hide. His pads are six inches.

The larger tracks we saw in Idaho, made my bear look like a baby. Maybe they weren't made by Griz, but i'd hate to run into the black bear that made them.

I try to be careful, no matter where I am in the boonies, no matter what kind of bears might be around.


May 2, 2001, 09:48 PM
we have had mountain lion reports every summer with in 20 miles of Washington DC in Montgomery County.

May 4, 2001, 03:51 PM
Keith: I live in Cody, Wyoming, and I, along with most of the hunters here, greatly resent the number of wolves and grizzly bears we have to contend with. They are overunning the place.

The problem is that large, furry predators are idolized, promoted, and defended by clueless, urban people who have no real knowledge of these animals, and won't allow any natural consequences to occur. If predators eat up all the elk (or house pets), we are supposed to stand by and say nothing. If a griz decides he wants an elk we have shot and tagged, we are supposed to let him have it. If a bear kills a human inside the bear management area, there will be no consequences because it is "just being a bear."

Most of this stuff is spear-headed by the Sierra Club, but is also tacitly supported by the anti-hunting groups, since limitations on big game hunting in "bear areas" are beginning to be talked about. Just what PETA wanted all along.

The problem isn't so much the predators themselves, but all the political baggage they bring with them. You may not have such difficulties in Alaska, but around here it's a real mess.


Keith Rogan
May 5, 2001, 12:11 PM

If those pads were 6" and the hide was just over 6' - then that equation doesn't work on black bears. A grizzly with 6" pads would go about 7 feet.


I feel your pain re: the Animal Rights fruitcakes, BUT, biologically speaking, the number of game animals in a given habitat have more to do with the severity of the winters (and other factors), than with the number of predators.
And of course, yes, these groups will attempt to use reintroduction as a way to limit hunting, etc, but I think these things are easily defeated because you have little things like science (specifically biology), on your side while they do not.
Think about this - at some point these wolves and bears will become numerous enough to come off the "threatened" list and become just another game animal. When that happens, you'll be able to hunt them just as is done in Alaska or Canada. Yes, the Animal Rights people will whine and demonstrate but it will do them no good, just as it does them no good here.
In the meantime you'll see grizzly tracks and hear wolves singing at night and THAT is one of the things that makes hunting worth doing.

Art Eatman
May 5, 2001, 09:44 PM
Keith, the problem is that in politics, science doesn't count near as much as sincerity and compassion. If facts were truly important, PETA wouldn't exist except as a bankrupt group of three or four soreheads, and we wouldn't have all manner of gun control laws...

I only have two or three hundred other examples...

:(, Art

Keith Rogan
May 6, 2001, 01:12 PM
>>>>>the problem is that in politics, science doesn't count near as much as sincerity and compassion. <<<<<

Nearly ALL of the funds that run state fish and game departments come from hunters. That means that not only do we have all the biology on our side, we have the bureaucracy backing us up as well.
I can only point to Alaska as an example - despite howls of protest from animal rights groups, the hunting of wolves and grizzlies has never been seriously threatened in any way.
The bureacracy merely points to the numbers (and the revenues), and does what they must to sustain the wildlife - that means hunting.

Don't confuse what's happening now when wolves and grizzlies are indeed a "threatened" species in the lower 48 with what can happen in the next ten years when these animals become a "sustainable resource" - the PETAheads will no longer have any sort of point.

Money talks and bull**** walks.

May 6, 2001, 10:03 PM
Down here in Tucson you sure don't want to let your cat wander out and about. Small dogs too. Something will get them and add them to the food chain.
Yes, I recall the Jaguar siteing a few years back. A couple of weeks back some guy got attacked by a Black Bear in the Santa Rita Mts, south of Tucson. He's okay, G&F captured and killed the bear, to bad.

June 29, 2001, 07:18 PM
Hunting in bear country is 'real hunting',
and I can only dream of hearing wolves howl
(here in suburban Maryland),
but I've got plans....

July 2, 2001, 09:27 AM
Montgomery County has a mountain lion population? :eek: How much have they spread into Southern MD (St. Mary's, Anne Arundal, Calvert, Etc)? My Boy Scout troop always went out to the woods without a care in the world or even an AR7 for backup and that was only like 2 years ago.


July 2, 2001, 08:31 PM
I know that here in CO the PETA-types have stuck items up for popular vote/ballot initiatives which does "manage" our wildlife. We got a ban on spring bear hunts (bad for the bear's children, you see), some (mumble) thing to do with predator control, etc. & ad :barf: Too, the DOW seems to becoming more & more so politicized by the money aspects. DOW heavily supports their Wildlife Viewing Project which is funded by the hunters dollars for non-hunters. Anybody see a conflict of interest there?

No argument with anyone's posts above - merely pointing out that we here haven't yet reached an equilibrium vis a vis the "Oh, I do so wish to pet a wild bear"-folks & others that, shall we say, have feet that actually touch the ground .... Too, you would not believe the shinanigans of the Save the Prarie Dog (rat) bliss-ninnies which abound in large numbers. Alas, no posted season to cull that herd as yet ....

If killer bees were only a bit more cuddly, we would have some idiot proposing protection of same ... takes all kinds (I guess).