California wildlife official in hot water over mountain lion hunt

Man my phone won't pull it up. I still have not seen one
In the wild. I have seen carcasses and prints before. I look for mountain lion sign though because it lets you know where the deer are. I just don't think there are as many as people say there are although our deer herds in sd do suck.

If Richards is removed, the current vice president, Michael Sutton, a biologist who works for the Monterey Bay Aquarium, would become president.

Well that didn't take long.

Quote from Budlite

If Richards is removed, the current vice president, Michael Sutton, a biologist who works for the Monterey Bay Aquarium, would become president.

Well that didn't take long.

:nutkick:

What a joke.... who would want to work for a State like that in the first place. Lions are amazing animals, and deserve to be hunted. They are also eaten, which the voters of CA I guess didn't bother to realize- not that that matters anyhow. How much money has been paid to residents of CA for damage (livestock and pets) since the 1990 ruling? How many children have been attacked? Adults? California's "stand back and don't touch" mentality is the worst approach to game management. You cannot understand that which you are not connected to. The separation of Man and Nature is never a good thing; we must learn to live side by side and observe our dynamic interaction along the way in order to co-exist and evolve together. I hope someone gives that guy a job.

can't say that i disagree with any of the above views but the reality is we live in a place (ca) and at a time where the environmental point of view rules. i think the photo is regrettable, as i think photos of lots of dead fish, lobsters, etc no mater if they're legal or not.

now, we are faced with the possibility of someone completely opposite of the current president being in charge of the ca dfg, nice. keep pics posts to a minimum, show only your closets friends and people you trust, otherwise we are going to pay the price no mater where the pics come from.

just my 2c.

Quote from metelin

can't say that i disagree with any of the above views but the reality is we live in a place (ca) and at a time where the environmental point of view rules. i think the photo is regrettable, as i think photos of lots of dead fish, lobsters, etc no mater if they're legal or not.

now, we are faced with the possibility of someone completely opposite of the current president being in charge of the ca dfg, nice. keep pics posts to a minimum, show only your closets friends and people you trust, otherwise we are going to pay the price no mater where the pics come from.

just my 2c.

Very well spoken brother. Even before the internet when me and my friends had a ''day to remember'', we did not send all our images to our club news letter, even though all were legal catches. Our photos were handed to close friends over a beer or coffee and put back in our back pocket. '' The conversation usually went ''Come with us next week, we'll put you on some nice fish mate''.

Cheers, Don

You guys need to move out of that commi state....

On a personal level I understand your position about the pics. I've gone through phases where I felt posting pics of my captures was disrespectful to the animal period, and would take away from my hunting experience. Obviously this is taking it to an extreme and I've shifted back and forth from this view. But as far sharing pics being like throwing fuel on the fire of restrictions and closures I disagree.

If pics of captures are viewed as a catalyst for more restrictions, then it's just an indication of what was inevitable anyways. I prefer to to take things head on. If someone has a problem with what is legal and ethical then lets deal with it now, not slowly slowly until before we notice it everything's gone. If things are left to develop slowly too many people remain complacent until it's too late, whereas bringing a situation to a head will cause a stronger emotional response and more opposition. If anything posting more pics will eventually take away the shock value, will condition people to see what is acceptable. In conclusion if it's ethical and legal do not let anyone intimidate you into hiding what you do, you'll just be burying yourself in the long run.

If it was inevitable then you are in the minority, which would have required a stronger resistance by the few, and japsw is right.

Well said Dan, couldn't agree more. Here is a little one that was caught incidentally while trapping bobcats. The cat was released unharmed. It was a puckering experience, but an incredible moment.

I can imagine that cat hissing and spitting. How did you get close to it to remove the trap? Did he have to be pinned down with a forked stick or something? I don't imagine that trap can be opened remotely.

I use a catch pole like animal control. Metal pole with a cable cinch on the end. One guy holds the cat, the other guy goes in and takes the trap off it's paw. Finally, take the catch pole off it's neck and hope it goes the other way.

How do you control the legs/paws? Wish I could see it.

You really don't control the paws. Once the cat is subdued (pinned with catch pole) they kind of give up. Like I said kind of. The trap is anchored solid on the end of it's chain. The person with the catch pole pulls the cat away from said anchor point thus stretching the leg with the trap on it. The one removing the trap then approaches from the anchor side and reaches in to release the jaw levers on the trap. I am glad it isn't something that happens often. With larger cats Wardens/biologists will drug the cat before removing the trap if one is caught incidentally. As I said this was a young cat.

These are what we are really after...

Beautiful animal. May I know what you do with them?

Skin them and keep the hides or they can also be sold. Bobcats like the one in the pic usually fetch about 300-400 bucks.

It'll be a good look for you guys BTW I recommend the movie to anyone who hasn't seen it.