They want to poison wild hogs Texas

[Koda94]

I see your Oregon system is working well. The distribution of hogs in Oregon has expanded greatly in only a few years...

oh absolutely, feral hogs are a real problem thats only going to get worse for any state that has them.
but trust me when I say its still extremely rare to see one here. Comparing Oregon's problem with Texas isn't the same comparison, Texas has virtually no public land. Oregon has a ton of public land (without googling it I will just roughly guess at least half. could be wrong... but we have a lot) and so hunters do not need to ask permission to find land to hunt here and whats interesting is most of the feral hogs here are confined to private lands... because hunters keep them there until they occasionally spill over onto public lands.

Charging to hunt hogs actually has allowed people to hunt on more lands than would otherwise be open for hunting. Texans are no different than Oregonians when it comes to letting strangers hunt on their land. The answer is usually NO unless there is profit to be made.

I can agree with that to a point. It works for Texas because you sold off all your public land and not every land owner is a hunting outfit, therein lies the problem I agree its not easy to get permission...

I asked a land owner last year if I could hunt hogs on his land. He politely said no (but gave me a tip).... I spent a weekend in hog country, and only found tracks on public land here. Most land owners wont let strangers hunt on their land, its hard to get permission. But in Texas since its legal to charge to hunt hogs, they have hunting ranches down there for that and they make a lot of money doing it... so I'm going out on a limb here (not much of one) to say its the states own fault if they have a problem... They call it a "hog problem" but at over $1700/hour to heli hog hunt, Id say Texans don't really want to get rid of them.

http://www.helihoghunt.com/pricing

[Jim Watson]

If I were a farmer or rancher who really wanted to get rid of the pigs, I would charge a fee to hunt... with a sliding scale of rebates the MORE you killed. Shoot a big boar for a "trophy" and you pay the full amount, wipe out a sounder or two and you get your entry money back.

[thallub]

The issue is the animals must be taken live. I'm not sure how wary hogs are of traps,

Hogs soon wise up about traps. Catch one or a few hogs from a sounder and the rest will avoid traps like the plague. i am now trying to deal with several sounders of trap shy hogs.

IME: If any part of hog trapping could be called "easy"; the easiest hogs to trap are solitary boars.

but based on the fact someone isn't making a ton of money trapping them and bringing them to market leads me to believe taking hogs live is easier said than done.

i know hog trappers and hog doggers who are making a good living selling wild hogs to meat processors and "hunting ranches". The "hunting ranches" here pay up to $500 for a boar with big cutters.

[Old Stony]

I think that some folks might have some wrong impressions about Texas and hog hunting, compared to other states. The people here that have made a business out of charging to hunt their properties are a very small percentage compared to the actual volume of land in Texas. Businesses generally high fence their property and put exotics or other game animals within their perimeters to charge for. Barring any accidental escape of the animals, they are contained on these properties and escapes are rare as these businessmen have some pretty large investments in the animals.
I see a lot of reference on here about hunting private lands and landowners not being hunter friendly...and it's not any different than other states in this regard. I grew up hunting in pheasants and ducks in Nebraska, deer and antelope in Wyoming, etc... In all cases I have found you need to establish a relationship of sorts with landowners so they know you will respect their property and not cause other problems for them. If you just stop near a house on a farm in Nebraska and ask if you can hunt their cornfields, beetfields, etc., chances are if you don't get really lucky, they will turn you down. Would you let strangers get out and stomp your crops down just to be friendly?
Just a guess on my part, but I would have to say probably 999 landowners out of 1,000 are not charging to hunt hogs on their land....they are just protecting their property and chances are local people they are better acquainted with are hunting the property if hunting is taking place there.

[Double Naught Spy]

I can agree with that to a point. It works for Texas because you sold off all your public land and not every land owner is a hunting outfit, therein lies the problem I agree its not easy to get permission...

Even in states with lots more public lands, they have lots of hog problems. Louisiana, for example, is also considering Warfarin at this time.

But in Texas since its legal to charge to hunt hogs, they have hunting ranches down there for that and they make a lot of money doing it... so I'm going out on a limb here (not much of one) to say its the states own fault if they have a problem... They call it a "hog problem" but at over $1700/hour to heli hog hunt, Id say Texans don't really want to get rid of them.

As far as helihunting goes, they kill more hogs than just about anybody. I have talked with operators of several heli-hunt services. They are usually booked up weeks in advance. Their biggest problem are hunts cancelled due to bad weather and the client gets mad because it may be 3-6 weeks before there is another opening. The price isn't keeping clients away. You are completely misunderstanding the problem.

You keep wanting to make the hog problem a Texas issue, but it really isn't. Until your state wins the war on hogs, you don't have a leg to stand on by using it as an example when the problem is still growing in your state despite the government coming in and telling landowners that they have to fight the problem.

Double Naught Spy,

The issue is the animals must be taken live. I'm not sure how wary hogs are of traps, but based on the fact someone isn't making a ton of money trapping them and bringing them to market leads me to believe taking hogs live is easier said than done.

LOL, let me quote myself here from a few posts ago...

There is a very good market for feral hog meat and we have inspection and buying facilities all over the state for LIVE hogs. Hogs are considered to be livestock and regulated as such when it comes to the sale or distribution for public consumption. The animals must be first inspected before slaughter and afterwards just like farm pigs and cattle.

As thallub noted, people certainly can make money on trapping hogs. My tenant's son put himself through college trapping hogs.

Getting back to the poison issue, sodium nitrate would have been a much better way to go, could have used the same feeders, would work faster, and pose much less risk to the environment, but somehow Warfarin got approved first and Sid Miller is running with it.

[rickyrick]

You can easily get them to avoid a particular piece of property, at least temporarily, but that only becomes someone else's problem.

[buck460XVR]

IMHO, one of the biggest deterrents to eliminating wild hogs is the money/enjoyment some folks make from the hunting of them. Many areas have wild hogs only because somebody introduced them to the area in the first place in order to hunt them. While there are farmers that are severely impacted from the damage feral hogs inflict, there are neighbors that are making a living off guiding or leasing land for folks to hunt those same hogs. While one wants all of 'em eliminated in the area, the other wants as many as possible in the same area. We have a similar problem here in Wisconsin with Whitetail deer. Dairy farmers work their tails off to produce high quality alfalfa, corn and soybeans. Those farmers with the best alfalfa end up with the most deer in their fields every night. Problem is, their farms are surrounded by recreational land that other folks bought for the sole purpose of hunting deer. While the farmer wants the deer gone, those folks surrounding him work hard to make their properties "sanctuaries" for the most deer they can and allow only a few animals to be killed every year. Regardless of what the farmer does on his property to control the deer, has little or no effect on the number of animals in the area. Seems to be the same "catch 22" farmers/land owners have in areas where feral hogs are present. Until there is unlimited access for hunters in the whole area, or there are impregnable boundaries to areas where hogs are not wanted, there needs to be other methods to controlling them besides hunting. Period.

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by Old Stony

I think that some folks might have some wrong impressions about Texas and hog hunting, compared to other states. The people here that have made a business out of charging to hunt their properties are a very small percentage compared to the actual volume of land in Texas. Businesses generally high fence their property and put exotics or other game animals within their perimeters to charge for. Barring any accidental escape of the animals, they are contained on these properties and escapes are rare as these businessmen have some pretty large investments in the animals.
I see a lot of reference on here about hunting private lands and landowners not being hunter friendly...and it's not any different than other states in this regard. I grew up hunting in pheasants and ducks in Nebraska, deer and antelope in Wyoming, etc... In all cases I have found you need to establish a relationship of sorts with landowners so they know you will respect their property and not cause other problems for them. If you just stop near a house on a farm in Nebraska and ask if you can hunt their cornfields, beetfields, etc., chances are if you don't get really lucky, they will turn you down. Would you let strangers get out and stomp your crops down just to be friendly?
Just a guess on my part, but I would have to say probably 999 landowners out of 1,000 are not charging to hunt hogs on their land....they are just protecting their property and chances are local people they are better acquainted with are hunting the property if hunting is taking place there.

this makes sense, I agree that its not easy getting hunting access on private lands... and also that the majority of private land in Texas is not a hunting ranch. The question I have though is for the private landowners that know they have hogs... Its one thing to turn away a stranger, but I would think it would be easy to find someone they know (and thus trust) that hunts to get rid of them?

there is a catch 22 to this situation we havnt brought up yet.... the goal is to eradicate the hogs completely, yet hunters love the idea of having them to hunt. Depending on the size of the private property it might not be such a big deal to have a few hogs around.

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

As far as helihunting goes, they kill more hogs than just about anybody. I have talked with operators of several heli-hunt services. They are usually booked up weeks in advance. Their biggest problem are hunts cancelled due to bad weather and the client gets mad because it may be 3-6 weeks before there is another opening. The price isn't keeping clients away. You are completely misunderstanding the problem.

You keep wanting to make the hog problem a Texas issue, but it really isn't. Until your state wins the war on hogs, you don't have a leg to stand on by using it as an example when the problem is still growing in your state despite the government coming in and telling landowners that they have to fight the problem.

thats a fair point, I can agree with that. Your right Oregon's hogs are growing not shrinking... thinking about this the hog populations here are sheltering primarily on private lands, so thinking about this its not any different than the problem in Texas. Thank you for this perspective.

[iraiam]

My ONLY concern with poisoning them, would be the risk to other animals than the targeted hogs. I believe that's why poisoning is illegal in most places.

there is a catch 22 to this situation we havn't brought up yet.... the goal is to eradicate the hogs completely, yet hunters love the idea of having them to hunt. Depending on the size of the private property it might not be such a big deal to have a few hogs around.

Some friends of mine are property owners in Texas, and have had hog problems, all hogs are problems for them because they use their property for agricultural purposes, in other words; to earn a living.

I have been invited and went on two coordinated hog kills in the last several years, I (and others) did this at our own cost, I took the time off from work, travel expenses, ammunition, ...etc, I did not really have to cover living expenses as they put us up on their land for several days. There is no choosing big, small, male, female hogs to "harvest" like a hunter, they are dealt with as they should be; a harmful and invasive species. One of the sisters in the family arranges for the hogs to be donated to various takers. Lets just say I lived up to my nickname "Deadeye" and earned a new one "Baby-Killer" on these hog kills, yes they are hog kills; NOT hog "hunts".

More recently they have come up with a way to contain the hogs in larger numbers in "area traps" or "corral traps" that the hogs are not smart enough to recognize as traps, even once trapped they may not really recognize it until they run out of food and water or the bullets start flying. I believe they have hired this out to a company that does this trapping for them now, and the hogs are taken by the hired company.

I can also tell you that they have been approached by "outfitters" wanting to capitalize on their hog problem by offering them a cut of the hunt fees to access their land and hog problems, the one offer I specifically know of was not well received at all, as they don't want to mix their agricultural business with a cottage industry of "hog huntin". I also seriously doubt that fees gained from hog hunters can offset the money they stand to lose from the loss of part of their land to agricultural use.

[rickyrick]

I did it, but I knew the land owners personally for many years prior.

Trust is what it takes, I was sought out because of trust.

Many land owners have been burned by paying hunters: damage, parties, four wheelin fun, injured livestock, gates left open and missing equipment.

One guy convinced my friend to let him dove hunt, so his kid could experience it... You wanna know what really occurred? An urban redneck dirtbike/drunken 4wheeler fest.
But then, I hear everyone complaining that farmers wont let people hunt them.

I hunted for free for many years. Not really free, because if I was going to the farm anyway, I'd give the owner a "day Off"; I'd put out round bales, fill water tanks, feed supplements, check the fences, bring supplies from town. I was also a heavy equipment mechanic in a past life, so I'd make some light repair work on the tractors. One farm provided me with a truck to use.

Free and open pig hunting on texas farms will not happen on a large scale.
I'm not sure how I feel about mass poisonings, I'm no biologist, so I can't back up any misgivings I have about it with scientific data.

[buck460XVR]

Even in states with lots more public lands, they have lots of hog problems. Louisiana, for example, is also considering Warfarin at this time.

For the most part tho, numbers on public land are low compared to those on private land, the reason being food sources. Part of the boon in hog numbers has to do with the production of Ag crops. This production makes food plentiful enough that sows have more and larger litters. On most public lands, the lack of Ag crops means fewer numbers overall and thus less damage. Damage done on public lands has less visual and economic impact and thus is not reported as much, nor is it as big of concern to most folks. Feral hogs in Louisiana have been there since the 1500s, and thus they made their impact on native plants and habitat many years ago....before it was even considered an impact. It's the impact on Ag crops that now has most folks in a uproar, and those now looking to re-establish native heirloom Flora. Used to be having a few feral hogs around for a food source was a good thing, now that their numbers have exploded thanks to Agriculture, and their presence is impacting the pocketbooks of farmers involved in that agriculture, not so good.

I see a lot of reference on here about hunting private lands and landowners not being hunter friendly...and it's not any different than other states in this regard. I grew up hunting in pheasants and ducks in Nebraska, deer and antelope in Wyoming, etc... In all cases I have found you need to establish a relationship of sorts with landowners so they know you will respect their property and not cause other problems for them. If you just stop near a house on a farm in Nebraska and ask if you can hunt their cornfields, beetfields, etc., chances are if you don't get really lucky, they will turn you down. Would you let strangers get out and stomp your crops down just to be friendly?

Would this stomping of crops by strangers be any worse that the rooting and eating of the farmers primary income source by the hogs? If those same farmers had to let strangers on their property in order to collect crop damage, do you think they would say no? While many will cite the damage caused by strangers as their reason for not allowing hunting, the biggest reasons are because they like to hunt themselves or have friends and relatives already hunting the property that do not want the competition.

Just a guess on my part, but I would have to say probably 999 landowners out of 1,000 are not charging to hunt hogs on their land....they are just protecting their property and chances are local people they are better acquainted with are hunting the property if hunting is taking place there.

But how much impact does that 1 outta a 1000 have if they own/rent a large parcel in the middle of the other 999 and they promote large wild hog populations? Especially if those other 999 don't allow access to enough hunters to make a difference in those populations? Much of this is wanting your cake and eating it too. I don;t want crop damage, but I want enough hogs around to hunt and be successful everytime I go out. For years farmers here in Wisconsin were allowed to collect crop damage from deer, while having their own private, no fence deer preserve. They too said no when strangers came to the door and asked to hunt and with good reason. Now they have to shoot X amount of antlerless deer before they can collect. Not only does this impact the deer on their property, but the whole deer herd in the area. While they do not have to let strangers hunt, they do need to eliminate a certain amount of animals before they can whine about crop damage. Sometimes without the help of those strangers, it's tough to take and dispose of those 40 does/fawns required to be shot.

There is no simple solution to feral hogs, kinda why wildlife officials in every state they are in, has struggled with it. While hunting them helps, it's clearly evident it's not the sole answer. It's also evident that not everyone wants them all gone, nor do most folks want strangers hunting their land. What are we supposed to do?

[Old Stony]

I manage some fairly extensive properties for a man in our area. This is recreational property, and not agricultural, but I do not allow the use of 4 wheelers, and strictly monitor hunting and fishing on these properties. For the most part, all hunters or fishermen that are allowed use of these properties are either known to me or the landowner..and it shall remain that way. I built a range on one of the properties with hanging steel targets, covered shooting area, etc....and a sign explaining some simple rules for use of the range. One major rule is no shooting at the steel targets closer than 100 yds. with high powered rifles. I have finally come to the conclusion that I am going to just have to remove the closer targets as people keep shooting holes in them with 223's or similar (at 25 yds. no less). I worry about splash back from close targets that are cratered and have holes shot in them, so they will have to go. I am just tired of welding up targets so another person (that is supposedly appreciative of the range) can shoot more holes in them.
And people wonder why we are reluctant to turn people loose on hunting lands?
The land owner and I have discussed the poisoning of hogs on his properties and there will be none !

[Double Naught Spy]

Free and open pig hunting on texas farms will not happen on a large scale.

It doesn't happen anywhere on a large scale, not Texas, Oregon, Louisiana, Florida, not anywhere.

I did send out the the EPA data sheet on Kaput to my landowners. All of them are going to let somebody else be the beta testers on this.

[iraiam]

I did it, but I knew the land owners personally for many years prior.

Trust is what it takes, I was sought out because of trust.

Agreed! I too was sought out for this reason, having personally known and worked with them for some time. I did not really owe them anything, but I consider them my friends so I was willing to help them with their hog problem, I was a "hired gun", they were appreciative. They have it largely under control now, but there was a period of a few years that was very frustrating for them. They spent quite a bit of money fortifying their fences and property boundaries, as well as much more fencing on the interior.

[CCCLVII]

IF they where poisoning wolves id be the "beta tester" up here in Idaho.

I have seen people advertise in the news paper looking for hunters to come kill wolves on there property. In Texas you have to pay to hunt a "nuance" animal. I think that Idahoans see the wolves as a much more serous threat than Texans see the Hogs as shown by their actions.

I fortunately, put up a sign saying wolf hunters welcome and have not seen a wolf in a long time on my land. If the animals are really a problem people will do what they have to, to take care of them.

[Double Naught Spy]

I have seen people advertise in the news paper looking for hunters to come kill wolves on there property. In Texas you have to pay to hunt a "nuance" animal. I think that Idahoans see the wolves as a much more serous threat than Texans see the Hogs as shown by their actions.

Hogs may be a lot of things, but they are not a "nuance" animal by any stretch of the imagination. They are more of a blatant, in-your-face kind of animal.

You have also made the mistake of singularly grouping Texans on this issue and it is a common mistake. You have at least two types of landowners when it comes to hogs. There are those that see them as a pest and those that see them as income.

I hear self righteous hunters proclaim frequently how they will not pay to kill somebody else's problem and others that proclaim that the landowner should be paying the hunter to take care of the problem. Well, for the landowners charging to hunt hogs, the hogs are not a serious problem and represent income year 'round.

You can darn well bet that if it was legal to charge people to hunt deer year 'round, landowners would, given the staggering losses of crops to deer, never mind collisions with vehicles.

I have yet to meet a landowner that truly sees hogs as a problem that is charging hunters. With that said, landowners in need are not letting random freeloading Bubbas come and hunt willy nilly either. The people most likely to let strangers hunt their properties do it for the $.

This is part of the reason why this who poison operation is going to fail so miserably. Not enough people are on board a solution.

[Mobuck]

As a landowner, lifelong farmer, and dedicated hunter, I can see both sides of this situation BUT I also see that it may not be the landowners' fault or responsibility re: feral hogs.
Some areas of Missouri have a feral hog population which may be related to some inconsiderate or downright criminal individuals. Either way, there has to be some responsibility assigned so that someone or some entity can take care of the problem. If it's a "landowner problem", the affected landowners need to band together to make a unified effort for control. If it's a "State problem", the state needs to be forced to provide resources to control the problem.
Last year, Mo Dept of Consternation declared a ban on hog trapping(maybe hunting also) on state land because individuals attempting to remove feral hogs "were interfering with State efforts to trap and remove hogs". No numbers were given as to how many hogs the MDC had actually managed to remove but obviously not enough as the population keeps growing. In north MO, it seems to be considered a "landowner problem" which relieves MDC of responsibility either in manpower or funding. Basically similar to the coyote livestock depredation --also a "landowner problem" which MDC does little to resolve.

[thallub]

This is part of the reason why this poison operation is going to fail so miserably. Not enough people are on board a solution.

Absolutely.

In the big scheme of things shooting hogs from helicopters is not all that expensive. The USDA has been shooting coyotes and wild hogs from helicopters for many years: They recently shot hogs from helicopters in the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge. Some ranchers in OK and Texas are hiring helicopter shooting teams.

Every time i bring up the subject of shooting wild hogs from the air, hog hunters get their hackles up and condemn the practice for "wasting meat".

Corral trapping of entire sounders is a good way to control the wild hog population. Again some are opposed to that method.

No discussion of the wild hog situation is complete without examining how humans assisted in the hog population explosion:

1. Folks are attracting and raising wild hogs with their use of "deer feeders".

2. Not content to let nature take it's course, the Bubba types continue to release hogs into the wild. Anxious to hunt hogs, they are releasing hogs in areas where there were no hogs.

i recently caught three 100 pound Hampshire pigs that looked like dirty show pigs. They had recently been released. One had rings in his nose: That hog would not have lived long in the wild.

3. Many, if not most,deer hunters refuse to shoot wild hogs.

At our deer lease i have seen one doe with fawn in the past two years. Before the place was over run with hogs, does with fawns were plentiful there.

Previous to last year i would not kill a hog unless there was someone to take the meat. Last spring i shot 50-60 small pigs with my Ruger .22. Also made a dedicated effort to hunt down and kill solitary boars. Killed about 20 boars that went over 200 pounds. Most were left where they fell.

One of my deer feeders will get a higher fence because big hogs have been jumping over it. i will not run an unfenced feeder. My hog snares are in the mail.


[/QUOTE]

[rickyrick]

I'll attest that you cannot try to control pigs and worry about wasting meat.

I would give away as many as I could, most people were very interested in receiving a pig... until I called them, lol. I had more luck with traps, I could hold them for a few hours while the person interested made arrangements.

I fed lots of pigs to the local wildlife, so not really wasting meat. No one eats a rat normally, or coyotes. A good pile of pig, keeps coyotes happily far away from the goats and such.

I won't kill native species indiscriminately, not even a coyote if they stay in coyote land, doing coyote stuff. I'll leave raccoons and any other animal alone if they aren't being a nuisance. I've hunted lots of varmints, but I don't seek any in the wild, only those that cause trouble. I will kill any pig, without a second thought.

[Jim Watson]

Same deal with donkeys (prospector's burros) and wild horses. They are not as bad as hogs but are still a burden on resources, eating native wildlife out of house and home. But they have constituencies who will pull strings to protect them.

[Chainsaw.]

Not all poisons stay dangerous after the target animal ingests it. Many break down to some form of chemical that kills the animal but then becomes benign in that body leaving the carcass to be safely consumed. NOT ALL...

[Double Naught Spy]

Right, sodium nitrate would work along those lines, IIRC. Either way, consumption of a hog that had ingested it and died would not be any more dangerous than eating a hot dog or bacon (which uses sodium nitrate as a preservative).

[Snyper]

Right, sodium nitrate would work along those lines, IIRC. Either way, consumption of a hog that had ingested it and died would not be any more dangerous than eating a hot dog or bacon (which uses sodium nitrate as a preservative).

It's Sodium Nitrite that works best for killing hogs, not Nitrate.

Sodium Nitrate is also known as "Peru Saltpeter".

They are very similar but not identical.

http://www.nola.com/business/index.s...sted_as_f.html

Sodium nitrite is far more toxic to pigs than people and is used in Australia and New Zealand to kill feral swine. USDA scientists say it may be the best solution in the U.S., but they're not yet ready to ask for federal approval as pig poison.

[Double Naught Spy]

Ah, very good! Thank you. Yes, nItrite.