Coyote Killing Contest Sparks Outrage...

Coyote Killing Contest Sparks Outrage in New Mexico

There are 1270 comments on the ABC News story from Nov 17, 2012, titled Coyote Killing Contest Sparks Outrage in New Mexico. In it, ABC News reports that:

A gun store-sponsored competition in which hunters shoot and kill as many coyotes as they can has sparked outrage among activists in New Mexico who have called it a "heinous killing contest." Animal Protection of New Mexico posted a petition on its website, rallying against the contest, which is sponsored by Gunhawk Firearms of Los Lunas.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at ABC News.

I see

Huntsville, AL

#207 Nov 19, 2012
lolol wrote:
All you out-of-towners are so knowledgeable about varmints. Come out here where these vermin are as numerous as jackrabbits and you can't leave stock or pets outside. I shoot them every time I see one on my property and I don't need any prize for doing it. I have lost many a cherished pet to these disease ridden vermin. So all you dogooders in Michigan, Florida etc etc shut the heck up if you don't have the problem in your yard.
very few jacks these days.

Don't pull the "you are not from around these parts" BS. It is so stupid.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#208 Nov 19, 2012
"Never Cry Wolf" by Farley Mowatt is a great read.
dont try

Huntsville, AL

#209 Nov 19, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
Too lengthy to post the whole study.
http://agrilife.org/texnatwildlife/coyotes/ta...
Conclusion
Although the results of these studies appear ambiguous at first glance, differences in methodologies among studies can explain the various outcomes. The Texas studies which involved short-term (< 6 months) coyote removal programs did not note differences in rodent and lagomorph populations. However, those studies which consistently removed coyotes throughout the year began to realize population-level changes after a minimum of 9 months of coyote removal.
Although white-tailed deer and bobwhite quail reproductive success increased with coyote removal, overall population densities for both species remained unchanged. This implies that a compensatory mortality mechanism is involved with these populations and that potential population increases of certain game species due to coyote removal are short-lived. All studies indicated that coyote control caused an immigration of coyotes into the removal areas. Coyote population densities returned to pre-removal levels typically within 3 months after removal efforts ceased.
Therefore, short-term coyote removal programs typically are not sufficient in reducing coyote density and, therefore do not alter ecosystem composition. However, intensive, long-term coyote removal has been successful in reducing coyote populations by over 40%, which has resulted in prey-base increases.
The intended goals of coyote control need to be determined prior to the onset of removal efforts. If the management objective is to reduce livestock losses caused by coyotes, then an intensive, short-term removal program may provide immediate relief of depredation just before and after parturition. However, if the coyote removal is practiced year-round, microherbivore populations may potentially increase; increased competition for forage with livestock may result. Consequently, a reduced stocking rate then may be required to offset competition, which may negate the number of livestock saved from predation.
If the goal is to increase the harvestable surplus of a game species, then it must first be determined that coyote control will increase the numbers of the target species. Next, can the additional animals be supported by the habitat? Finally, will predation as a mortality source be replaced with other mortality factors acting in a compensatory manner? Until these questions can be answered, then coyote removal would not be warranted.
to talk sense to goobers - it's hopeless.
Dr Freud

France

#210 Nov 19, 2012
I see wrote:
<quoted text>
very few jacks these days.
Don't pull the "you are not from around these parts" BS. It is so stupid.
Said the SOCK PUPPET!
Roast coyote: MMMMMmmmmmm MMMMMM!!!!!!
Tray

Belden, MS

#211 Nov 20, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
Too lengthy to post the whole study.
http://agrilife.org/texnatwildlife/coyotes/ta...
Conclusion
Although the results of these studies appear ambiguous at first glance, differences in methodologies among studies can explain the various outcomes. The Texas studies which involved short-term (< 6 months) coyote removal programs did not note differences in rodent and lagomorph populations. However, those studies which consistently removed coyotes throughout the year began to realize population-level changes after a minimum of 9 months of coyote removal.
Although white-tailed deer and bobwhite quail reproductive success increased with coyote removal, overall population densities for both species remained unchanged. This implies that a compensatory mortality mechanism is involved with these populations and that potential population increases of certain game species due to coyote removal are short-lived. All studies indicated that coyote control caused an immigration of coyotes into the removal areas. Coyote population densities returned to pre-removal levels typically within 3 months after removal efforts ceased.
Therefore, short-term coyote removal programs typically are not sufficient in reducing coyote density and, therefore do not alter ecosystem composition. However, intensive, long-term coyote removal has been successful in reducing coyote populations by over 40%, which has resulted in prey-base increases.
The intended goals of coyote control need to be determined prior to the onset of removal efforts. If the management objective is to reduce livestock losses caused by coyotes, then an intensive, short-term removal program may provide immediate relief of depredation just before and after parturition. However, if the coyote removal is practiced year-round, microherbivore populations may potentially increase; increased competition for forage with livestock may result. Consequently, a reduced stocking rate then may be required to offset competition, which may negate the number of livestock saved from predation.
If the goal is to increase the harvestable surplus of a game species, then it must first be determined that coyote control will increase the numbers of the target species. Next, can the additional animals be supported by the habitat? Finally, will predation as a mortality source be replaced with other mortality factors acting in a compensatory manner? Until these questions can be answered, then coyote removal would not be warranted.
Thanks for proving killing coyotes does no harm to the population of them. It's like rats, you will never kill them all, the best you can do is keep their numbers from exploding.
Tray

Belden, MS

#212 Nov 20, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't FORCE my views on others. I discuss them. I explain WHY I have those views.
As a conservative, I believe in CONSERVING.
"If, as you declare, you're a "libertarian," then you would be completely, antithetically against what it is that you purportedly support."
If I support only killing animals to survive, why would I be against that?
I believe God created and loves all creatures and that he wants us to be good stewards. If I were to support the massive slaughter of coyotes (for no reason), that would be a slap in the face to his wonderful creation.
The same reason he made rats.

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#213 Nov 20, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
"my puppy has every right to be outside."
You're right. Your puppy does have every right to be outside. And as a responsible pet owner you have every responsibility to be outside with him if there are predators around.
"I’ll just shoot it and my puppy will be safe."
Nice. Do you shoot it when it comes around to bother your puppy? Or do you go off into the desert (or the mountains) and seek out as many coyotes to kill as possible?(That is what we are talking about here, ya know.) And even if you do the latter, does that mean your puppy is now "safe?"
Your puppy should NOT be alone outside anywhere. Do you really think coyotes are the only predators that can kill your puppy?
Like I asked before, What do you propose? Eradication of all predators on earth?
Frankly I don’t care how many coyotes are killed. They can kill them all. Kill all the squirrels too, I hate those tree rats. If I’m hunting I’ll shoot every squirrel I see. Nasty little creatures. But, it is amusing shooting one with 00 buck or even a 30-06.

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#214 Nov 20, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
"Coyote families are no different that dogs with puppies; playful and cute!"
Thanks for at least posting my words this time.
So tell me, how are dog families and coyote families different?(other than the fact dogs may live in a human dwelling.)
Your words were quoted the first time.

In a word, domestication.
Churmudgeon

Pineville, AR

#215 Nov 20, 2012
The fact is its not illegal to shoot coyotes or blackbirds ect. that are (about to). And since this is a Republic and not a Mob Rule Democracy. Its the individuals god given & counstitional right to engage in activities that many dont approve of. If what some believe is true and the killers activities acutally cause numbers to increase wheres the problem?
Churmudgeon

Pineville, AR

#216 Nov 20, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankly I don’t care how many coyotes are killed. They can kill them all. Kill all the squirrels too, I hate those tree rats. If I’m hunting I’ll shoot every squirrel I see. Nasty little creatures. But, it is amusing shooting one with 00 buck or even a 30-06.
Those Squirrl can be a nusance. In town,s where they dont allow hunting the numbers can explode. they sometimes den up in the attic,s & wall,s of buildings & homes. They chew up insulation deposit feces & urine and sometimes cause fire,s from chewing electrical wiring. We had a huge ice storm and a late spring hard freeze several years ago. The freeze damaged the buds and their wasnt a mast crop that year. the Squirrl starved & didnt reproduce many young. Their numbers havent rebounded yet.
dpb

La Veta, CO

#217 Nov 20, 2012
"... it is amusing shooting one with 00 buck or even a 30-06." As it would be you.
Churmudgeon

Pineville, AR

#218 Nov 20, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
Too lengthy to post the whole study.
http://agrilife.org/texnatwildlife/coyotes/ta...
Conclusion
Although the results of these studies appear ambiguous at first glance, differences in methodologies among studies can explain the various outcomes. The Texas studies which involved short-term (< 6 months) coyote removal programs did not note differences in rodent and lagomorph populations. However, those studies which consistently removed coyotes throughout the year began to realize population-level changes after a minimum of 9 months of coyote removal.
Although white-tailed deer and bobwhite quail reproductive success increased with coyote removal, overall population densities for both species remained unchanged. This implies that a compensatory mortality mechanism is involved with these populations and that potential population increases of certain game species due to coyote removal are short-lived. All studies indicated that coyote control caused an immigration of coyotes into the removal areas. Coyote population densities returned to pre-removal levels typically within 3 months after removal efforts ceased.
Therefore, short-term coyote removal programs typically are not sufficient in reducing coyote density and, therefore do not alter ecosystem composition. However, intensive, long-term coyote removal has been successful in reducing coyote populations by over 40%, which has resulted in prey-base increases.
The intended goals of coyote control need to be determined prior to the onset of removal efforts. If the management objective is to reduce livestock losses caused by coyotes, then an intensive, short-term removal program may provide immediate relief of depredation just before and after parturition. However, if the coyote removal is practiced year-round, microherbivore populations may potentially increase; increased competition for forage with livestock may result. Consequently, a reduced stocking rate then may be required to offset competition, which may negate the number of livestock saved from predation.
If the goal is to increase the harvestable surplus of a game species, then it must first be determined that coyote control will increase the numbers of the target species. Next, can the additional animals be supported by the habitat? Finally, will predation as a mortality source be replaced with other mortality factors acting in a compensatory manner? Until these questions can be answered, then coyote removal would not be warranted.
The first sentence of the second paragraph is enough for me to justify killing coyotes. I want to increase the number of Bobwhite Quail.
Yes

Huntsville, AL

#219 Nov 20, 2012
eternal cynic wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankly I don’t care how many coyotes are killed. They can kill them all. Kill all the squirrels too, I hate those tree rats. If I’m hunting I’ll shoot every squirrel I see. Nasty little creatures. But, it is amusing shooting one with 00 buck or even a 30-06.
we know you have no common sense and ethics. Cruel and stupid.
Right

Huntsville, AL

#221 Nov 20, 2012
Churmudgeon wrote:
The fact is its not illegal to shoot coyotes or blackbirds ect. that are (about to). And since this is a Republic and not a Mob Rule Democracy. Its the individuals god given & counstitional right to engage in activities that many dont approve of. If what some believe is true and the killers activities acutally cause numbers to increase wheres the problem?
you have a god-given right to be an idiot - it's in the constitution.

Since the "hunt" is over you can all go back to your dumfck dating sites anf leave us alone.
You are

Huntsville, AL

#222 Nov 20, 2012
Buck Fiden wrote:
<quoted text>.
trespasser, troll.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#226 Nov 20, 2012
Defiant1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything about eating habits in the animal world could be considered "evil and cruel" by those that fancy themselves intellectually and morally
superior to others.
Humans are still animals. Last time I checked, we haven't evolved into
some wonderful beings that are far beyond other animals killing their prey.
Nuisance animals need to be disposed of.
I do not consider the food chain evil. Though it can be cruel. Yes, humans are animals and also part of the food chain. Animals kill prey for food. That is what humans should also do.

What you consider a nuisance is a necessary part of nature. If you don't eat coyotes, you don't kill them.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#227 Nov 20, 2012
lolol wrote:
All you out-of-towners are so knowledgeable about varmints. Come out here where these vermin are as numerous as jackrabbits and you can't leave stock or pets outside. I shoot them every time I see one on my property and I don't need any prize for doing it. I have lost many a cherished pet to these disease ridden vermin. So all you dogooders in Michigan, Florida etc etc shut the heck up if you don't have the problem in your yard.
No, we don't have that problem. We ain't that stupid to leave a "cherished" pet outside for predators to eat.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#228 Nov 20, 2012
Willothewisp wrote:
"Never Cry Wolf" by Farley Mowatt is a great read.
What's it about?

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#229 Nov 20, 2012
dont try wrote:
<quoted text>
to talk sense to goobers - it's hopeless.
Even if it enlightens just ONE person makes it all worthwhile.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#230 Nov 20, 2012
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Thanks for proving killing coyotes does no harm to the population of them. It's like rats, you will never kill them all, the best you can do is keep their numbers from exploding.
You missed the point from my other posts back around page 2). Killing them DOES cause increases in their population. Those studies along with the ones conducted in Texas proves that killing them is simply a waste of time and effort. Nature has a fine balance (Yes, Churm, it does) and when we interfere, we usually don't make things better.

BTW, in nature, no species is left to "explode" beyond a certain point. Nature will take care of the excess.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories - Mexico Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Juan Gabriel was Mexico's gay icon a " but he n... 22 hr david traversa 1
News House panel seeks criminal charges for Universi... Aug 26 Rosa Linda9580 2
News Border Patrol erecting new fence in unwalled Ne... Aug 15 ima-Ilis Myka Ash... 10
News Solar Panel Again Stolen From New Mexico Boy's ... Jun '16 Dave Locklar 5
News Singer known from Mexico's 'The Voice' fatally ... Jun '16 bozo 1
News Singer known from Mexico's 'The Voice' fatally ... Jun '16 bozo 1
News Mexico's 'El Chapo' Likely to Be Prosecuted in ... Jun '16 Shore to Shore 1
More from around the web