|
Author
|
Topic: Aerial gunning in S.D. gone??
|
the bearhunter
HM PROSTAFF & MIDWEST REGIONAL GURU VOTED MOST HANDSOME MINNESOTAN
Member # 3552
|
posted March 30, 2011 02:38 AM
just seen that the aerial gunning in S.D. was cancelled??. why?? and how will this affect the cattle/sheep guys there. i hope some of you guys arn't on the chopping block as far as jobs go
Posts: 1049 | From: minnifornia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted March 30, 2011 05:19 AM
Due to many earmarks and budget cuts, things are a little tense in certain lines of work right now. I can damn sure tell you that.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrossJ
SECOND PLACE: PAUL RYAN Look-a-like contest
Member # 884
|
posted March 30, 2011 05:19 AM
Are you meaning it has been stopped permanently, as in some form of legislation or mandate??
--------------------
A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body.
Posts: 1025 | From: on a water tower | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrossJ
SECOND PLACE: PAUL RYAN Look-a-like contest
Member # 884
|
posted March 30, 2011 05:22 AM
Posting same time as Cal...sorry. I get it now, its a money thing.
--------------------
A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body.
Posts: 1025 | From: on a water tower | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TA17Rem
Hello, I'm the legendary Tim Anderson, Southern Minneesota Know it all
Member # 794
|
posted March 30, 2011 06:06 AM
Its proably the same shit the military goes through every year about this time... The boys up stairs are just a little slow approveing the funds is all...
--------------------
What if I told you, the left wing and right wing both belong to same bird!
Posts: 5613 | From: S.D. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 30, 2011 07:09 AM
I understood that that program was funded in part, at least, by the ranchers?
Roade might have his hands full?
Good hunting. LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32361 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted March 30, 2011 01:07 PM
TA, for once in your life, when you don't know what you're talking about, shut the fuck up.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted March 30, 2011 01:25 PM
Cal,
From a cost-benefit time angle, does the cost associated with aerial gunning come in at less money spent per coyote killed than it would cost to do the same work from the ground? I would think that it would since the aerial gunning seems so much more effective and cost-effective. Gonna be a lot of ranchers hurting if this sticks, as well as a lot of government hunters/ trappers.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5440 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Greenside
seems to know what he is talking about
Member # 10
|
posted March 30, 2011 01:44 PM
Kinda wondering myself what's going on out there. Cutting positions and re-interviewing for jobs. Supposedly increasing fed gunning to pickup for the job cuts and now cutting the gunning. Looks like every rancher might have to take care of his own problem.
Posts: 719 | From: IA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
the bearhunter
HM PROSTAFF & MIDWEST REGIONAL GURU VOTED MOST HANDSOME MINNESOTAN
Member # 3552
|
posted March 30, 2011 01:45 PM
i'm not even sure if it's true or not?? just read it somewhere?? sure seems like a bad time to cut aerial gunners if true
Posts: 1049 | From: minnifornia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SD Howler
taught Huber everything he knows, but not everything HE knows!
Member # 3669
|
posted March 30, 2011 02:26 PM
The following is a SD news article in reference to the federal aerial hunting situation.
Aerial predator control is grounded
Airplanes that normally fly over South Dakota to control predators like coyotes are grounded because of federal funding cuts.
Merrill Nelson is with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services. He says the funding runs out on April 8th unless Congress acts to reinstate the program.
Nelson tells South Dakota Public Broadcasting that the planes are grounded now but could fly until the April deadline if county predator control boards want to pay for it.
He says the loss of aerial predator control comes during the critical spring calving and lambing seasons.
--------------------
Steve
Predator Calling
rattler51@pie.midco.net
Posts: 51 | From: SD | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
JD
HONORARY OKIE .... and Tim's at fault!
Member # 768
|
posted March 30, 2011 03:02 PM
That don't sound good Cal, hope everything is OK with you ADC guys.
--------------------
Jason
--------------------------------------
What do Obama & TA17Rem have in common........both are clueless asshats!!!
Posts: 1456 | From: NE. | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted March 31, 2011 06:29 AM
The aerial hunting in SD is run federally with federal dollars. SD funding was an earmark and all earmarks were removed in the last budget so our aerial hunting budget disappeared. So as we sit right now we have no aerial hunting except in areas that have predator districts which are privately funded by members of each district. These districts hire private pilots or can pay for the federal plane to fly.
Lance, numbers between ground and air can be twisted and turned to show pros and cons to just about any scenario.
The truth is they both go hand in hand. You have to have both to make it work.
LB, we all have our hands full and are doing our best to reduce losses to our producers.
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted March 31, 2011 09:52 AM
Okay, private pilots, but I heard that you have to be a licensed ADC man to shoot from an airplane? For the rest of us schmucks, it's against the law.
GH/LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32361 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
nd coyote killer
HUNTMASTER PRO STAFF
Member # 40
|
posted March 31, 2011 09:57 AM
Leonard it depends on what state. In Wy if you go through the proper channels you can get licensed to do it on private ground.
--------------------
"Sure are cocky for a starving pilgrim" - Bear Claw
Posts: 385 | From: On a hill | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted March 31, 2011 03:14 PM
LB. any resident, not sure about nonresident, can gun for any permited private pilot here in SD. I don't think it matters the more I think about it.
You must pass gunner training in Utah to gun in a federal plane. No ifs ands or buts!
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
the bearhunter
HM PROSTAFF & MIDWEST REGIONAL GURU VOTED MOST HANDSOME MINNESOTAN
Member # 3552
|
posted March 31, 2011 04:40 PM
Randy, do the private landnowners (cattle/sheep) guys pony up enough $$ to keep the program going??
Posts: 1049 | From: minnifornia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted March 31, 2011 08:00 PM
Dave private dollars keep predator districts flying, they are seperate from the state program. These districts go above and beyond what they get from the state or fed programs service wise.
Let's just say Dave county has a predator district, it has 30 members, they "tax" themselves 25 cents for every cow a member has and 50 cents for every sheep a member has. You have 400 cows so you contribute at least $100 for predator control annually. It can be all aerial control or it could be for extra ground control, equipment for the guys doing ground control, etc.
All these districts have their own bylaws rules etc.These districts are not just limited to livestock producers and do have contributers who are not livestock producers but want to help with the control. The good neighbor policy.
Lets just say you get $3000 in a district and you hire a pilot to hunt for $150 an hour so you will get roughly 20 hours of flying to control predators on the land of the members of the district. Usually if you get a good pilot he will wait for the best conditions, close to calving as possible with good snow cover, so the members get the most bang for their buck.
If it's on sheep again you want to use your hours of flying wisely when conditions are in your favor. Lambing season, locating and removing dens,etc. all play in to where and when. You have to save some time for unplanned killing etc especially on the sheep. Remember this is above and beyond the state or fed service from the ground and air.
Usually these districts have a local pilot who can help them immediately when something does occur. This may not always be the case with the other plane as it is servicing as much wider area and may already be tied up in other areas. The equalizer with planes is the weather, mother nature can screw with the best of plans.
This goes back to the ground and aerial control working hand in hand.
I would sure hate to lose our pilot and gunner so I hope somehow this all works out for the best.
[ March 31, 2011, 08:11 PM: Message edited by: Randy Roede ]
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
nd coyote killer
HUNTMASTER PRO STAFF
Member # 40
|
posted March 31, 2011 09:17 PM
It's a mess period!! I hope those low lifes on welfare are living good down south!!!!!
--------------------
"Sure are cocky for a starving pilgrim" - Bear Claw
Posts: 385 | From: On a hill | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
6mm284
Knows what it's all about
Member # 1129
|
posted April 01, 2011 04:00 AM
By private pilot do you mean just a non state or federal employee pilot or do you mean a commercially licensed pilot self employed.
FAA does not allow private pilots to receive compensation. Was not aware there is any exemption to that reg.
[ April 01, 2011, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: 6mm284 ]
Posts: 198 | From: N46 06 E91 11 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Roede
"It's Roede, like in Yotie
Member # 1273
|
posted April 01, 2011 05:47 PM
6M I guess I needed to take it a step further, seperating the private pilot sector.
They are in two seperate areas, a guy with just the private pilots license and a guy with his commercial pilots license. the commercial guy may do it for hire, contract, etc.
There are numerous rules and regs for both and I would assume it may vary from state to state.
--------------------
The only person dumber than the village idiot is the person who argues with him!
Posts: 669 | From: Pierre SD | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted April 02, 2011 07:43 AM
ADC men and livestock producers in SD were told by those in positions of authority that when SD Game, Fish & Parks (GF&P) signed a cooperative agreement with USDA/APHIS/WS to take over the aerial hunting program that our Federal funds would no longer be considered an "earmark". That was SUPPOSED TO BE the primary justification for signing the cooperative agreement. Our Federal funds were to be considered a part of WS direct budget and safer than Federal funds that were considered "earmarks".
What actually transpired was once again inconsistant with what we were told. No surprise there and exactly what many of us have come to expect from an ADC program, er I mean Wildlife Damage Program, that is being administered by game wardens and biologists with no practical ADC field experience. Hope I didn't offend anyone by stating the truth.
The bricks of this program just continue to fall and the conscientious ADC men are counting the days to retirement. This is not the program for those with a genuine concern with the well being of the livestock industry as was the task many of us signed up for. Unfortunately some of us have too many years in to quit now. It's difficult to watch the DOCUMENTED livestock losses that have resulted due to the decisions that have been made by those in positions of leadership.
In short, this program was a disaster before the aerial program shut down. I'll add that the WS aerial program was the best thing that happened to this program in recent years.
As always, I'll accept any and all consequences for stating the truth.
C-dog: "From a cost-benefit time angle, does the cost associated with aerial gunning come in at less money spent per coyote killed than it would cost to do the same work from the ground?"
Depends on the situation.
If you have open country that is accessible to aerial hunting (permission for large blocks of land with limited cover to hide coyotes), aerial hunting can be much less costly than what it would require to take those same coyotes on the ground. Add in the elements of snow cover and sunlight and you have the best conditions.
In contrast, if you have habitat that will hide coyotes and/or areas where permission is checker boarded, it may be more cost effective to remove those coyotes with traps, snares, M-44s, and calling. Each situation is different. Snowmobiled coyotes have a tendancy to be unable to differentiate airplane engine noise from snow mobile noise and most of those coyotes dive for cover at the sound of an airplane engine.
As far as ADC costs per coyote killed, that figure is irrelevant just as ADC costs per livestock killed. Critics of the program (not suggesting you are an ADC program critic Lance), have always measured ADC dollars spent per coyote killed and ADC dollars spent per livestock loss but the only cost / benefit measure that matters is program costs weighed against livestock that would have been killed in the absence of an ADC program.
Most ADC programs are not trying to reduce overall coyote populations. Overall population reduction is not cost-effective nor desirable due to the amount of funds, manpower, and land access it would require. Rather, most ADC programs conduct seasonal and location specific population reduction in and around areas of historic problems. Research has stated that you have to kill over 70% of any coyote population for numerous years to reduce that population. In SD, I doubt the ADC program kills even 10% of the overall STATEWIDE coyote population. Effective predator control is all about timing and sight specific coyote removal with most occurring after the prime fur season. The following year, these areas become dispersing pup magnets and the process repeats itself. One savy fur trapper I know liked to work areas in the winter that the ADC program worked in the spring and summer. He figured out that these areas were dispersing coyote pup magnets and held more coyotes than surrounding areas that were being defended by territorial adult coyotes. This is precisely why, in the absence of mange and parvo, we have to remove about the same number of coyotes every year from the same areas.
The Cook Ranch is the only study I am aware of that measured livestock loss in the absence of a predator control program. This was a 3 year study on a large sheep operation in SW Montana in the early 80's. ADC efforts were discontinued 1 year prior to the study to allow coyote populations to build to what they would be in the absence of any predator control efforts. On a 1000+ head sheep operation, predators (primarily coyotes) killed an average of 26% of the lambs per year for the 3 year period of the study and researchers certainly deterred predation by their daily presence. Contrary to what had been stated by environmental armchair experts, this study proved that coyotes did not target the sick and the weak and they did not always consume what they killed. Something most ADC men knew but hadn't been documented in a study. Due to the heavy expense of reimbursing the Cook Ranch for their lamb losses, more studies like it have not been conducted and at one time the study was in danger of going broke. Today this study would have cost $41,600 just to reimburse the rancher for his losses for one year.
Effective predator control efforts also have to be very timely with the most important predator removal time frame being from Feb. through April. Gee, guess what time frame we lost our aerial hunting program in? Now we are expected to remove these same coyotes with half the available hours that we used to have without an effective aerial hunting program. Haha! It's almost beyond comprehension. Nothing surprises me anymore.
Getting back to costs per coyote, doesn't matter what the coyote population is, to effectively reduce coyote predation you need to remove as many coyotes as possible during the Feb. - April time frame within 4 - 6 miles of any sheep operation with a history of loss. The expense is pretty much the same whether you have a pair of coyotes in every square mile or a pair of coyotes in every township because all the land base needs to be covered whether by aerial hunting or searching for coyote sign.
While I'm on a tangent, let me also address a common theme amongst the less than informed. It has been stated repeatedly by ADC program critics that it is not in our best interests to remove coyotes that are not bothering for fear that coyotes that replace removed coyotes might start killing livestock. Stop and really think about this. Why would a coyote that is familiar with an area not kill livestock yet it's younger and unfamiliar replacement kill livestock? As if some coyotes are genetically predisposed to kill livestock while others are not. That has to be one of the most ridiculous ignorant statements that was stated once then repeated like a sheep blat. There is numerous factors that determine whether or not coyotes will kill livestock. Most have to do with OPPORTUNITY and CONFIDENCE LEVEL. An older coyote that is familiar with a given area will have far more confidence in killing livestock than an unfamiliar younger replacement. If coyote predation has not occurred in the presence of familiar adult coyotes, it's probably because the opportunity never presented itself and there is enough natural food available. The same situation would be present with a replacement coyote. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard some rancher say, "I didn't think coyotes would kill calves". As far as sheep, it's a rare adult coyote that won't kill sheep when provided the opportunity.
Tim, I hope you are right. I hope this is just a measure of government accountability and the WS funds will be reinstated based on justification. The threat of losing ADC funds does parallel with military cuts depending on the presidential administration. Federal funds for any program are never guaranteed.
The ADC program has always been better off with a Republican administration that is ag friendly as opposed to an administration that would rather throw money at those who are unwilling to work. This administration and those it caters to has no problems knowing that some rancher or elk hunting guide is losing their livelihood so that someone else might see a wolf someday.
Hey Lance, if you want material to write a real interesting article for the T&PC, you should consider writing about the Cook Ranch Study. I think it would do a lot to build bridges between ADC trappers and the private sector to help in the understanding of what we do. If you are interested, I'll get you the information.
~SH~
[ April 02, 2011, 10:30 AM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Wily E
unknown comic
|
posted April 02, 2011 08:35 AM
On the topic of taking dens. An effective ADC program will remove adult coyotes before they den. An ADC trapper who removes lots of dens is already behind the 8 ball.
My goal is zero dens but due to workloads and available hours, I fear I will have far more dens to remove this year than in years when I was able to do the job correctly.
~SH~
[ April 02, 2011, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: Wily E ]
IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 02, 2011 09:25 AM
All good stuff, Scott. But, the following struck me for it's logic.
quote:
One savy fur trapper I know liked to work areas in the winter that the ADC program worked in the spring and summer. He figured out that these areas were dispersing coyote pup magnets and held more coyotes than surrounding areas that were being defended by territorial adult coyotes. This is precisely why, in the absence of mange and parvo, we have to remove about the same number of coyotes every year from the same areas.
I guess it is comparable to sticking your finger in the dyke. A zero sum, as the pundits like to say.
All I know is; politicians tend to be a bunch of dishonest evil bastards. It's hard to trust any of them as having the best interests of the public. On the other hand, the "term limits" solution has had some unintended consequences. Maybe we need a savvy trapper?
GH/LB
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32361 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted April 02, 2011 03:52 PM
quote:
On the topic of taking dens. An effective ADC program will remove adult coyotes before they den. An ADC trapper who removes lots of dens is already behind the 8 ball.
In big sheep numbers and big range where the sheep are trailed miles and miles throughout the summer, this simply isn't true. You just keep trying to clear a path, and if you don't den the country within several miles of where the sheep will be in the fall the move up will slaughter you. This might be a great theory where the sheep are concentrated in a smaller area, but it won't work here. You kill all you can this time of year and then den your ass off on top of it.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
