Wild Horse Cull

Originally Posted by steelhead

Without facts, you have nothing.

That's exactly what I was pointing out

[steelhead]

Why would you even point that out about yourself?



And again, thanks for nothing!


Thats, lol, wow

[Donkey Oatey]

Did you miss or just leave out the part that states.

Strongly expressed competitive interference (i.e., one
species blocking another’s access to a limited resource) or
exploitation (depletion of the food resource by one species)
would influence the interpretation of spatial relationships.
Behavioural observations provided little evidence for
competition through interference in this grazing system
(cattle, mule deer, elk and moose all were observed feeding
in proximity to feral horses without interaction), but dietary
similarities and spatial overlap indicated the potential for
exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses. In contrast,
feral horses would be not expected to exploit the food
resource of browsing herbivores (moose, mule deer and
white-tailed deer), which utilize herbage primarily during
early growth stages in spring and summer (Banfield 1974).


So the study, which in your own words didn't study the competition aspect states that there is potential for exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses.


Was that left out by convenience?


Would love to see the new study.

I also wonder why feral horses were found in 93% of elk feeding grounds and elk were only found in 6% used by horses. Seems to me that would mean the elk are being pushed out. The study doesn't actually say that. Says that it is due to the large numbers of elk and distribution. Hopefully we can see from the new study what, if any, changes in those numbers occur.

[steelhead]

What I posted showed they shared and were not on those ranges at the same time.

Did you miss that?



And that was in the conclusion, discussion section, not the horse, elk sections.

Add in cattle to that equasion also. They also overlap elk. There was 1500 cattle in that equasion. 200 horses. With those numbers, this study shows that cattle are far worse on Elk than horses and far worse to elk as a whole, even for the months they were there.


Great article!

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

Would love to see the new study.

It will be interesting for sure but considering the study area, I doubt we'll learn much about the additional stress that these horses place on species like bighorn sheep.

[TheLegend]

Alberta outdoorsmen magazine had a real good article on why feral horses should NOT be in alberta. Good read. cant remember the exact magazine though. Good on whoever it was to get this going.

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by steelhead

What I posted showed they shared and were not on those ranges at the same time.

Did you miss that?



And that was in the conclusion, discussion section, not the horse, elk sections.

Add in cattle to that equasion also. They also overlap elk. There was 1500 cattle in that equasion. 200 horses. With those numbers, this study shows that cattle are far worse on Elk than horses and far worse to elk as a whole, even for the months they were there.


Great article!

Conclusions. You know, totaling up of information and making conclusions, answers, summation of data.

Yes that is where I posted from. The whole study. Can't cherry pick one paragraph and make it 100% applicable to the argument you want to make.


I have said, over and over, the cattle effects on the west country are another discussion for another thread. This one is about horses. Seems that 30yrs ago horses could cause competition with elk for food. Bringing up cattle is a smoke screen to change the topic. Want to know my view, no cattle should be out there as well, at least those have to come out for more than half the year and are accounted for.

Now let us see what the new study says has happened in the last 30yrs. Do the numbers stay the same, or do they change one way or another.

[steelhead]

Based on opinion or fact? Who was the author?



I would like to see that article. I bet its full of opinion.

Cause there is a lack of facts.


STEELHEAD

[TheLegend]

Ill have to dig it up from my mountain of AO Magazines....but there were facts...like how feral horses are like lawn mowers eating and competing for food with natives animals like elk. I am for the culling. Their not native get them out.

[sunsetrider2011]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

I can't believe none of you can find a Snickers or two in your kids Hallowe'en loot.

[uglyelk]

[QUOTE=Donkey Oatey;1680661]Did you miss or just leave out the part that states.

Strongly expressed competitive interference (i.e., one
species blocking another’s access to a limited resource) or
exploitation (depletion of the food resource by one species)
would influence the interpretation of spatial relationships.
Behavioural observations provided little evidence for
competition through interference in this grazing system
(cattle, mule deer, elk and moose all were observed feeding
in proximity to feral horses without interaction), but dietary
similarities and spatial overlap indicated the potential for
exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses. In contrast,
feral horses would be not expected to exploit the food
resource of browsing herbivores (moose, mule deer and
white-tailed deer), which utilize herbage primarily during
early growth stages in spring and summer (Banfield 1974).


So the study, which in your own words didn't study the competition aspect states that there is potential for exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses.


Was that left out by convenience?


Would love to see the new study.

I also wonder why feral horses were found in 93% of elk feeding grounds and elk were only found in 6% used by horses. Seems to me that would mean the elk are being pushed out. The study doesn't actually say that. Says that it is due to the large numbers of elk and distribution. Hopefully we can see from the new study what, if any, changes in those numbers occur.

This is what I was referring to as cherry picking. Gleaning what you want to support a position. How is something an elk feeding ground or a horse feeding ground if they are both found there. If horses and elk were found in same space 93% of the time it means they use the same area 93% of the time. Doesn't mean they are eating the same thing. That is why a posted a study based on scat composition and not spacial use . If horses were found eating with elk 93% of the time does it not hold true that elk were also found in the same area...oh schit animals live in the woods what a discovery. Hope they gave the lad a PHD!

It also appears that 6 to 7 percent of the time the two species eat in areas that hold nothing in interest for the other.

Number crunching drivel....we already know the two species are in the same area...what you thought they would stick to their own neighbor hoods. They are not immigrants.

[uglyelk]

Originally Posted by TheLegend

Ill have to dig it up from my mountain of AO Magazines....but there were facts...like how feral horses are like lawn mowers eating and competing for food with natives animals like elk. I am for the culling. Their not native get them out.

But sheep hunter is hear already regurgitating his claim.s

[steelhead]

DR. Mark Boyce wrote an article about elk migration and dispersal. I liked it!


It said that, in some areas, that bears took 50% of elk calves.

Now we have to add bears to the equasion along with cattle, wolves and, the way less populated horses.

I never knew elk travelled that far to escape predators.

Did they just leave the area? greener pastures?

Some herds travelled over 300 kms!!

Maybee were seeing less elk because they moved to escape predators as there seems to be an overabundance of them. In the article, it says most went to BC and montanas flathead valley. Are there lots of wolves in Montana?

Why hasnt this author mentioned horses as a cause for thier migration?

Are horses as migratory, or do they stick to thier single range?hummm?


Reading about migratory elk is very cool. Answers alot of questions that others ignore due to thier hatred of these horses.


Legend - I respect your view on horses.


STEELHEAD

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by uglyelk

Did you miss or just leave out the part that states.

Strongly expressed competitive interference (i.e., one
species blocking another’s access to a limited resource) or
exploitation (depletion of the food resource by one species)
would influence the interpretation of spatial relationships.
Behavioural observations provided little evidence for
competition through interference in this grazing system
(cattle, mule deer, elk and moose all were observed feeding
in proximity to feral horses without interaction), but dietary
similarities and spatial overlap indicated the potential for
exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses. In contrast,
feral horses would be not expected to exploit the food
resource of browsing herbivores (moose, mule deer and
white-tailed deer), which utilize herbage primarily during
early growth stages in spring and summer (Banfield 1974).


So the study, which in your own words didn't study the competition aspect states that there is potential for exploitation of elk and cattle foods by horses.


Was that left out by convenience?


Would love to see the new study.



This is what I was referring to as cherry picking. Gleaning what you want to support a position. How is something an elk feeding ground or a horse feeding ground if they are both found there. If horses and elk were found in same space 93% of the time it means they use the same area 93% of the time. Doesn't mean they are eating the same thing. That is why a posted a study based on scat composition and not spacial use . If horses were found eating with elk 93% of the time does it not hold true that elk were also found in the same area...oh schit animals live in the woods what a discovery. Hope they gave the lad a PHD!

It also appears that 6 to 7 percent of the time the two species eat in areas that hold nothing in interest for the other.

Number crunching drivel....we already know the two species are in the same area...what you thought they would stick to their own neighbor hoods. They are not immigrants.

So what you don't see is that horses are where elk are 93% of the time. Elk are where horses are 6% of the time. Seems the elk try to stay away from the horses. This isn't cherry picking. I have posted the link to the study. I post quotes, you post quotes, I challenge your quotes, you complain that I am cherry picking. It gets tiresome.


I don't get this so called hatred of horses you keep talking about. What I see is outdoorsmen that are asking questions about an introduced species in an area that they are pretty much unchecked other than the horse capture program.

These same animals have greater protection than native species. That is what we are talking about.

I just don't get the overwhelming love that some posters lavish on these animals. Very bambi like. Weird.

[steelhead]

"I just don't get the overwhelming love that some posters lavish on these animals. Very bambi like. Weird"



I dont love them. I dont care if they cull. Go for it! I never said I was against it.


Its just sad to see something done to a forest resident with zero scientific basis. After all we read, and shared here, its public opinion, not science that dictates what is going to happen to these animals.

Look at fisheries! No money to pay for studies, but they will gather a bunch of residents and anglers together to share thier opinion to fix problems. NO SCIENCE. Weak


Then we have journalists whose opinion is not science based but a bunch of google searched sources and resentment towards a specie. Dont journalists have to verify thier sources? Is google and opinion good sources for science? I'm sure everything we read on the internet is true and scientific. Heck, its used by a journalist here to educate the public about this, supposed problem. There isnt the prefix DR. in front of his name. So, its opinion based on cherry picked facts from google!
Most incredibly and irresponsibly weak!

if you based your opinion from the "lawn mower horse" article, even weaker.



This province seems to do nothing that is science based. Almost zero. They ask the public and others who dont have DR. in thier names.

Is this really what you want managing your resources?

Opinion based reactions and resentment? No facts? no science? Cherry picked opinions advertized to the public in a homegrown publication?


Thats what were getting....

.... so chew on it real slow, The longer you chew, the worse its gonna taste!


STEELHEAD

[Donkey Oatey]

Wow that whole diatribe for one sentence. Pretty weak.

YOU asked for studies. YOU asked for proof. Some get posted and you go off on those that are posted and totally dismiss the new study that isn't even done yet and totally slag it.

I think this might be a good time for the ignore button.


I have posted several times, yet no one, I repeat no one has comment on.

These horses are considered livestock with special protection. If these animals are truly wild why are they not under the Wildlife Act and have the same protection as the animals they may be in competition with?


Can't have it both ways. If they are livestock treat them as livestock. If they are wild treat them as wild. Quit sitting on the fence.

[pseelk]

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

Wow that whole diatribe for one sentence. Pretty weak.

YOU asked for studies. YOU asked for proof. Some get posted and you go off on those that are posted and totally dismiss the new study that isn't even done yet and totally slag it.

I think this might be a good time for the ignore button.


I have posted several times, yet no one, I repeat no one has comment on.

These horses are considered livestock with special protection. If these animals are truly wild why are they not under the Wildlife Act and have the same protection as the animals they may be in competition with?


Can't have it both ways. If they are livestock treat them as livestock. If they are wild treat them as wild. Quit sitting on the fence.

I agree 100%

[sunsetrider2011]

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

Wow that whole diatribe for one sentence. Pretty weak.

YOU asked for studies. YOU asked for proof. Some get posted and you go off on those that are posted and totally dismiss the new study that isn't even done yet and totally slag it.

I think this might be a good time for the ignore button.


I have posted several times, yet no one, I repeat no one has comment on.

These horses are considered livestock with special protection. If these animals are truly wild why are they not under the Wildlife Act and have the same protection as the animals they may be in competition with?


Can't have it both ways. If they are livestock treat them as livestock. If they are wild treat them as wild. Quit sitting on the fence.

Steel was right there has been no proof posted. and also right on certain studies done a small portion of wildlife lands in the foothills. pretty weak argument as well,, i want to see photos,, which i will get when i am out there hunting this month, How many of you yay sayers will go out and do the same to prove your stance,, other than pure specualtion and the backs of someones say so. The so called cull is a farce, always has been. They have been sustainable for hundreds of years, however with recent hunting practices it becomes someones agend to make it better for game animals to hunt supposedly. I think direct calls to the minister and Dave Ealy is in order, to get the scientific facts they supposedly have to warrant removal of a species that has been there for at minimum 200 years+

Originally Posted by sunsetrider2011

Steel was right there has been no proof posted. and also right on certain studies done a small portion of wildlife lands in the foothills. pretty weak argument as well,, i want to see photos,, which i will get when i am out there hunting this month, How many of you yay sayers will go out and do the same to prove your stance,, other than pure specualtion and the backs of someones say so. The so called cull is a farce, always has been. They have been sustainable for hundreds of years, however with recent hunting practices it becomes someones agend to make it better for game animals to hunt supposedly. I think direct calls to the minister and Dave Ealy is in order, to get the scientific facts they supposedly have to warrant removal of a species that has been there for at minimum 200 years+

This cull has been going on for 200+ years and I've yet to see a single shred of evidence to say that the government is considering eradication or even an increased cull....for someone so hung up on facts.......Why weren't you outraged last year? I got sucked into believing that the government was actually going to do something with these horses but it seems it's just another case of media hype about the same old. Big freaking deal.....175 horses out of a population of over 1,000. I'm guessing you'll send more than twice that many calves to their death this year. You know, to manage your herd.

[sunsetrider2011]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

This cull has been going on for 200+ years and I've yet to see a single shred of evidence to say that the government is considering eradication or even an increased cull....for someone so hung up on facts.......Why weren't you outraged last year? I got sucked into believing that the government was actually going to do something with these horses but it seems it's just another case of media hype about the same old. Big freaking deal.....175 horses out of a population of over 1,000. I'm guessing you'll send more calves than that to their death this year. You know, to manage your herd.

Oh i was part of the thread last year too, and yup will be selling calves this fall and in the spring to feed the masses that feel entitled, Because it is economically feasable.

Originally Posted by sunsetrider2011

Oh i was part of the thread last year too, and yup will be selling calves this fall and in the spring to feed the masses that feel entitled, Because it is economically feasable.

And to manage the numbers in your herd....something sound range management relies on. Come on sunset...what's your solution...let them keep multiplying until they run all of our ungulates out of the foothills?

[sunsetrider2011]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

And to manage the numbers in your herd....something sound range management relies on. Come on sunset...what's your solution...let them keep multiplying until they run all of our ungulates out of the foothills?

They havent run them out in 200+ years, and hunters have probably taken more game animals in one season than the whole predation in one year. And still they co -exist. and I like your phrase OUR UNGULATES, If thats the Case They Are OUR HORSES TOO.

Originally Posted by sunsetrider2011

They havent run them out in 200+ years, and hunters have probably taken more game animals in one season than the whole predation in one year. And still they co -exist. and I like your phrase OUR UNGULATES, If thats the Case They Are OUR HORSES TOO.

Only because of the cull...did you miss that part? Have at...if you as a rancher can't grasp the basics of responsible range management this is pointless.........I am done!!!!!!!!!!!

[steelhead]

Were hung up on facts. you bet.
You of all people should know that. You say that to everyone. and recently.



Donkey. You gave me facts. And i used them to discredit your beliefs and opinion just as the article did. Sorry, but you offered it up and the article proved you wrong. I dont agree and neither does that article.


Who cares what you call them, livestock, pain in the nostril or whatever, the point is, they dont harm elk, or, well, anything really, and your submitted article showed that. Some overlap, no competition. Thanks, you did it to yourself. Slag it, no, i read and understood it.

Dont hate the player, hate the game.



If you have nothing else to add to the discussion of " the decimation and destruction" they cause, then you have no valaid point as thats the only thing that matters. Not what you want them named! ridiculous!!

[pseelk]

It matters what you call them because as feral animals they dont belong on the eastern slopes.Those are the facts,

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Only because of the cull...did you miss that part? Have at...if you as a rancher can't grasp the basics of responsible range management this is pointless.........I am done!!!!!!!!!!!

The wording was a bit harsh there sunset and I do apologize.....obviously you understand range management. It's just frustrating to see you ignore that knowledge when it comes to horses in the mountains.....there now I feel better. Time for a rum.

[sunsetrider2011]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

The wording was a bit harsh there sunset and I do apologize.....obviously you understand range management. It's just frustrating to see you ignore that knowledge when it comes to horses in the mountains.....there now I feel better. Time for a rum.

[missingtwo]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

.........I am done!!!!!!!!!!!

After 13 pages somehow I doubted this part.

Originally Posted by steelhead

Who cares what you call them, livestock, pain in the nostril or whatever, the point is, they dont harm elk, or, well, anything really, and your submitted article showed that. Some overlap, no competition. Thanks, you did it to yourself. !!

I have yet to see any overgrazing in the foothills or mountain areas unless the area was fenced.

[Donkey Oatey]

Originally Posted by steelhead

Were hung up on facts. you bet.
You of all people should know that. You say that to everyone. and recently.



Donkey. You gave me facts. And i used them to discredit your beliefs and opinion just as the article did. Sorry, but you offered it up and the article proved you wrong. I dont agree and neither does that article.


Who cares what you call them, livestock, pain in the nostril or whatever, the point is, they dont harm elk, or, well, anything really, and your submitted article showed that. Some overlap, no competition. Thanks, you did it to yourself. Slag it, no, i read and understood it.

Dont hate the player, hate the game.



If you have nothing else to add to the discussion of " the decimation and destruction" they cause, then you have no valaid point as thats the only thing that matters. Not what you want them named! ridiculous!!

Yet I posted a quote from the same discussion/research paper saying that there is possibility of competition for food you dismiss it. You completely slag a report that isn't even finished yet. You slag a report saying its too old, or commissioned by the wrong people or there is a hidden agenda.

Good luck.

Yes it matters what they are called. It matters how they are protected. It matters how they are managed.

Sorry but you have zero credibility in my eyes.

Go back. Read the entire study on the animals we are talking about in the area we are talking about. It is appropriate. Quit stopping when you think you found the "Ah-ah" statement. Read the whole thing, including the Conclusions at the end.

I keep say, let's see what the new study says, and compare to the old study. Let's see what changes, if anything.

[guywiththemule]

Good posts by Donkey Oatey and Walking Buffalo on this subject(zero emotion). Manage them like any other stray livestock or wildlife. (Take note;present government -Just get some balls and get off the pot and pick one). My father and his friends and other ranchers caught wildies in the 40`s,50`s and 60`s. They either broke them for personal use or sold them to Red TOP for slaughter. The local ranchers,farmers,trappers and other affected parties(guide,outfitters,etc.) insured that the local wildie population never became a problem(read stray animal).I have rode and handled wild horses in Alberta since I was a youngster. I inspected a fairly large number of captured wild horses in central Alberta in the 90`s as a deputy livestock inspector. If some of you "horse kissers" would use your logic instead of emotion to deal with the present unexceptable number of wild horses on the eastern slopes we could come up with a workable solution of managing the wildies.