New twist on the Tueller drill!


PDA






Bob F.
March 8, 2006, 10:19 PM
Read an article re: Mountain Lions, maybe in "Field & Stream". Says a cougar can do 45 feet in a single leap! 15 Yds!! Not the 21'=7yds we're accustomed to but twice as much (and I'm guessing, quicker and more shock value).
And they're more common all the time. Of course, DNR says there are NO Mountain Lions in WV, but they are protected

Stay safe.
Bob

If you enjoyed reading about "New twist on the Tueller drill!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rero360
March 8, 2006, 10:58 PM
the DEC says the same thing about here in NY, but they're here, I've seen tracks in my back yard, neighbors have seen one at their pond, I wouldn't mind getting a shot at one and getting it mounted, too bad it would be illegal to do so.

'Card
March 8, 2006, 11:07 PM
I saw one at a distance while deer hunting in Fayette County, WV about 8 years ago. Pretty amazing thing to see, to be honest. He was climbing up an old strip mine high-wall... when he moved it was so fluid it was like watching liquid fur flowing uphill.

I've always thought that with the WV deer population booming the way it was in the last few years, that they'd really start becoming more common there - but the herd's population growth has stabilized or actually dropped now according to some people, so I guess that didn't happen.

280PLUS
March 9, 2006, 01:58 AM
I wonder what the "Tueller Time" or "Tueller Distance" is for a ~ medium sized dog...

Lucky
March 9, 2006, 02:30 AM
We have mountain lions in the city. Probably because we have so many large and stupid rabbits in the city. The cats don't attack people, afaik. One guy I work with saw one in the grounds 100 feet away, and it hopped away from him onto a wall. The only reason it didn't run away, most likely, is because it had a rabbit cornered (he left the cat and rabbit alone to work it out).

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 02:46 AM
Mountain lions can attack people just like wild boars or badgers can also. I would not waste time worrying about it myself since the odds are pretty low. In fact alot more people are killied by bees every year than bears, cougars, etc combined. We did have a woman here in Oregon killed by one recently while biking. Never go into the woods alone if you want to be safe. I will never understand why people would want to kill and mount one. What would it prove? All it would accomplish in mind is killing a majestic animal and making nature a little poorer for it.

Knob Creeker
March 9, 2006, 05:45 AM
Why would you kill & mount it?

Well the most important reason is for population control. Just like any other animal, the population needs to be kept at a certain level for the safety of humans and for the health and safety of the cougars themselves. If the population of mountain lions grows too large (in Oregon it is currently above 5000 compared to the California population estimated to be 4000-6000) it will have a detrimental effect on the population of deer, elk, and other prey species. When they can no longer find their normal meal, they seek similar sized mammals to prey on, including domestic animals and people. With a larger cougar population, there is also a greater probability that humans will encounter them in non-rural areas. Hunting is the best way to control their numbers because it stabilizes the population in a regulated manner. I don’t advocate poaching or over hunting and that is why the fish and wildlife agencies were created. They use population counts to develop rules governing how many animals can be harvested, what areas they can be hunted in, and what age and sex can be killed.

If you hunt and kill something you should waste as little of the animal as possible. I have never heard of any one eating a mountain lion, but I’m sure there are those that do. The skin is usually mounted so that it can be enjoyed long after the lion would have died from natural causes, had it not been killed by the hunter. (Although I think a cougar fur jacket would be much nicer!)

It is not about proving anything. Hunting is not about that to anyone who engages in it; only to those who do not understand it and are not educated about its importance to wildlife management. Hunting accomplishes much more than ‘killing a majestic animal and making nature a little poorer’, in fact it creates an ecological balance that makes it possible for humans and cougars to coexist.

Vitamin G
March 9, 2006, 07:05 AM
All it would accomplish in mind is killing a majestic animal and making nature a little poorer for it.

Yes, and my living room a little richer for it :evil:



(coming from the guy who doesn't even hunt deer or geese)

Browns Fan
March 9, 2006, 07:49 AM
+1 Vitamin G!

Quote:
"the DEC says the same thing about here in NY, but they're here, I've seen tracks in my back yard, neighbors have seen one at their pond, I wouldn't mind getting a shot at one and getting it mounted, too bad it would be illegal to do so."

Why is it illegal to kill and mount something that is not suppose to exist in the first place?:banghead:

rero360
March 9, 2006, 11:50 AM
good point, they may have one of those radio transmitter devises. like I said haven't seen one yet, but I do think they are amazing creatures and if I ever were to kill one I would mount it to preserve its beauty. I have heard of people eating the meat, claim its a little sweet, I think I'd try it.

to make it all legal, just got to yell "its coming right for us!" :evil:

Lucky
March 9, 2006, 01:22 PM
My uncle shot one that had been around his farm. He finally had a rifle when the cougar was around, and though the first shot hit the dirt in front of the cat it didn't move. 2nd got him, and uncle proudly took it to a taxidermist to be mounted. Taxidermist said he needed the paperwork, so uncle called fish and game for some papers:) Fish and game were RIGHT over, and investigated the whole incident. They took the cat (out of his freezer) and took pictures of the farm, and the only reason my uncle got off was because he had lambs. Only larger animals, aiui, and he would have been penalized.

Our premier said in public once, "Shoot, shovel, and shut up." In an expanding bureaucracy that might be the only way left for honest farmers.

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 01:27 PM
I can understand killing to control population. However I have never seen anything yet to say the cougars are over-populated. I always see the problem as being territiry incroachment. I may be wrong since I have done no research yet myself. It is the mounting I have a problem with. What does this accomplish. I do not see it as a testimony to anything other than being able to pull a trigger on a weapon made by someone else. Now if you mounted one that still had the teeth marks on it from where you wrestled it to the ground and chewed out it's jugular vien with your bare teeth, that would be a testimate.

TexasRifleman
March 9, 2006, 01:32 PM
All it would accomplish in mind is killing a majestic animal and making nature a little poorer for it.

I love how this argument is used about "majestic" animals, but never cows, chickens, dung beetles, wasps, etc.

So Nature is only poorer if we shoot cute animals and not ugly ones?

rbernie
March 9, 2006, 02:02 PM
Never go into the woods alone if you want to be safe. Why? So you can have someone to outrun? :D

As the mountain bikers in California (http://4cornerscup.com/2004/cougar.htm) have been busy proving, being in a wilderness area without effective means of protection against things with fur-n-fangs simply means that you're willing to be a meal. Having more than one of you there simply gives the critter more to snack on, if recent reports (http://adventuretravel.about.com/b/a/056308.htm) from 2003-2005 are any indication. :rolleyes:

So Nature is only poorer if we shoot cute animals and not ugly ones?I have this debate with my wife (the woman who's been a Dallas zookeeper volunteer for over a decade) all the time. She tells me that my hunting is bad because it kills pretty animals roaming about in natural habitats, but thinks that eating steak every day is OK because she only eats ugly animals that were raised in captivity. The pretty ones roaming around in the wilds are somehow 'worth more' than those that were not. :confused:

Would I kill a cat? Sure I would, if I felt that in any way, shape, or form that me or mine were threatened by it. Hopefully, I wouldn't come to that decision lightly, but in the end the cat is no more 'important' than the Russian boar shoulder that my family ate on for dinner last night.

Biker
March 9, 2006, 03:13 PM
Cougar roast cooked up in a crock pot is some real fine eatin'. Hard to tell the difference between roast cat and a good pork roast.:)
Biker

XLMiguel
March 9, 2006, 04:02 PM
Cats can jump! My boy Jake can stand about a foot away from the fridge and jump to the top (approx 5'9") in one leap, or can launch from the back of my chair to the couch about 10' away easily. He weights about 12-13 lbs. and is about 11" at the shoulder.

The 7-10 yards allowed for a person in teh Tueller drill should probably at least be tripled for a big dog or mountain lion. By the time you see 'em coming (esp. with the cat), you've got a problem -

Biker - I had a flank steak of African lion in Grand Mariner sauce once - it was very tasty, but tough - I guess the crock pot would take care of that.

Biker
March 9, 2006, 04:27 PM
Mike
A crock pot could make my second mother in law tender, and that's sayin' something.;)
Biker

gunsmith
March 9, 2006, 04:37 PM
and being that I'm mostly vegetarian I wouldn't go hunting one.
but after reading this thread I would consider any mtn lion that isn't leaving to be a threat.
My last cat, motorhead ,could really fight if he needed to.

Biker
March 9, 2006, 05:18 PM
From my somewhat limited experience with cougar, if you can see it, you don't have much to worry about, generally speaking.
It's the one above and behind you that will get ya.
Biker

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 07:14 PM
TexasSIGman, there is a vast difference between killing a vastly abundant animal for food that was bred to be food and killing a wild and declining animal for sport. I am sure you did not need me to tell you that though. :)

'Card
March 9, 2006, 07:15 PM
If I ever shot a cougar I'd definitely want to have it mounted, but I can't really think of a good reason to shoot one other than protecting livestock - and I don't have any livestock.

When I saw that one climbing the high wall in WV, I was watching him through my scope with the crosshairs on him. Would have been an easy shot, but I didn't take it.

To tell you the truth, I really just enjoyed the experience for what it was - a rare glimpse of a rare (in WV, anyway) beautiful animal, undisturbed in his natural element. Killing him would have kind of ruined it, I think.

I guess if they were a common sight for me in the woods then I might feel differently about it. I used to feel the same way on the rare occasions when I'd see a bear, but now that their population is booming in WV and I'm seeing them more often, the experience is a little less special, and the urge to pull the trigger is a little stronger. :)

PlayboyPenguin
March 9, 2006, 07:16 PM
Why? So you can have someone to outrun
Exactely...that is why I always say the best bear defense is a slower, plumper, and juicer friend. :D

TexasRifleman
March 9, 2006, 07:21 PM
TexasSIGman, there is a vast difference between killing a vastly abundant animal for food that was bred to be food and killing a wild and declining animal for sport. I am sure you did not need me to tell you that though.

And there's the problem. Who decides when a species is "declining"?

An interesting read on the subject:

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/Popular/mtnlions.html

The bottom line of this report:

The magnitude of the problem can be understood when we consider that the ratio of deer to mountain lions has apparently declined from an estimated 750:1 in 1950 to about 30:l in 1988. Deer populations cannot meet the needs of the mountain lions and maintain their numbers with the heavy predation that these ratios bring. This is especcially true when you consider the additional predation from coyotes, bears, and bobcats.

This was a 1989 study but follow ups have not seen a decline in the rate of overpopulation of the kitty cats.

These "majestic" animals are headed towards severe overpopulation and are beginning to damage the food chain of other species.

(This particular example is California, but similar studies exist in other areas)

A Colorado perspective:

For several thousand years man accepted the fact that large predators could and would kill and eat him, his livestock, and his pets. Man saw large predators as direct competitors for food and as prey. Now man is being asked/told by a selfish self anointed "elite" to enter into a new age where man and animals coexist without killing. Man can be forced to comply with these new rules. However, animals still obey their instincts and will not obey man's new rule.

Knob Creeker
March 10, 2006, 07:54 AM
It is the mounting I have a problem with. What does this accomplish. I do not see it as a testimony to anything other than being able to pull a trigger…

I still think your looking at this whole concept from a very narrow viewpoint. I will agree with you that there are some hunters who like to mount their kill for bragging rights and to make them feel they have conquered nature. I believe these might be the folks you are talking about. It is important that you know not all hunters are motivated by this concept. The majority of them mount stuff so that they can view it and enjoy its beauty. It’s kinda like fine art. There are collectors who buy paintings so they can show them off to all their snooty friends as a monetary statement. A way of showing everyone how much money they can afford to just throw around. There are other collectors, I would think the majority, who buy paintings because they really enjoy them. They might get a feeling of stimulation, wonder, or pleasure from a work, the same emotions some would experience when looking at an animal mount or touching a fur rug.

there is a vast difference between killing a vastly abundant animal for food that was bred to be food and killing a wild and declining animal for sport.

I do not condone killing ‘a wild and declining animal for sport’, but we are not talking about shooting a Mountain Gorilla, snow leopard, or a black rhino. In some places the number of mountain lions is decreasing, but in other places like Oregon, the population is increasing rapidly. I wouldn’t go trying to kill a mountain lion here in Kentucky because their numbers are so small that the Government claims them as extinct, but I would have no problem killing one in Oregon where biologists have determined that the population is increasing and controlled hunting would not have any adverse effects.

As for animals bred for food, I kinda think they are all here for us to eat. If you’re a biblical person why else do you think they were put on this planet? “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you…” One can also look at evolution and find that humans have gotten to the top of the food chain. Although cougars are not raised for food like cattle, nature has bred them for the consumption of the next predator in line and as far as I can tell, only humans and other mountain lions fit that position in North America.

middy
March 10, 2006, 10:04 AM
Someone needs to lay off the Oprah for a while... :rolleyes:

roo_ster
March 10, 2006, 10:19 AM
[Homer Simpson voice]If God didn't want us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat![/Homer Simpson voice]

PP:
You're right in that more folks die from bee stings than from large predators, here in the USA.

Thing is, some of those large predators are increasing their numbers to the point that there are beginning to be serious problems with man/beast encounters and the predators' food sources.

Most folks who keep something from their hunt do so as a reminder of that time and to admire the critter. My mom still has the tail feathers from the first pheasant I shot, artfully aranged in a vase like a bouquet of flowers. She was happy I was sucessful, but even happier that she was able to get her hands on some beautiful materials. Oh, and that pheasant was mighty tasty!

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 12:38 PM
I do not have anything against hunting. I just think that when you cross the line into "trophy hunting" that bothers me. Even then it is not the hunting itself but the vulgar display of testosterone that most of these guys think they are showing. You go to these outdoorsman shows and all these guys stand around showing their pics of their stuffed animals like they are trying to show who has the biggest penis. It is like they think they are somehow a man because they can point a weapon and pull the trigger. Doesn't help that most of the ones I have had experience with were short, pudgy, non-athletic guys with big mouths. That kind of taints my perspective. As for cougars, like I stated in my post, I have no idea if they are decining or not. if they are I would be against hunting them. Either way i am not fond of the type of person that stuffs them and keeps them in their living room. it always comes across as a testimate to their personal insecurities. That is just my opinion though. It is also a little creepy. Just like when the lady down the street with too many dogs has the nes that die stuffed and put on the couch.

Lisa- "Dad, those all come from the same animal"
Homer- "Yes Lisa, one wonderful, magical animal" (said with extreme sarcasm)

rbernie
March 10, 2006, 01:12 PM
Even then it is not the hunting itself but the vulgar display of testosterone that most of these guys think they are showing.You're reading an awful lot into this without first-hand knowledge of that which you decry. You have done nothing but PRESUME to identify what motivates these hunters based upon your limited outside observation of them. Not to mince words, but that's just not fair to either them nor you. Then you try to back up your opinions of hunters and their values with some limited 'science' in regard to the conservation of natural resources, only to confront the fact that your perspective of *that* topic is too limited to be of much use.

Let's cut to the chase. It offends you that some people do what they do (be it trophy hunting or any other behavior or activity). To that I have two comments:

1) If you're going to be offended by something, it pays to actually research the topic and becomes as well-versed as you can in the issues. Ground your objections in some form of reality.

2) Remember that you haven't the right to impose your value structure upon other adults. You *do* have the right to assemble a set of values FOR YOU and to live your life by those values. But others get to do the same thing. And going thru life throwing stones at folks who's values do not line up with yours is a fruitless exercise.

TexasRifleman
March 10, 2006, 03:16 PM
Either way i am not fond of the type of person that stuffs them and keeps them in their living room. it always comes across as a testimate to their personal insecurities.


I am not fond of the type of person that has no tokens or reminders of things they have done or accomplished in life. It always comes across as a testement to their lack of participation and understanding of the feeling that comes with accomplishing some goal whether it's hunting, bowling, fishing or chess.

Hawkmoon
March 10, 2006, 03:48 PM
Cats can jump! My boy Jake can stand about a foot away from the fridge and jump to the top (approx 5'9") in one leap, or can launch from the back of my chair to the couch about 10' away easily. He weights about 12-13 lbs. and is about 11" at the shoulder.

The 7-10 yards allowed for a person in teh Tueller drill should probably at least be tripled for a big dog or mountain lion. By the time you see 'em coming (esp. with the cat), you've got a problem -
The original Tueller drill was based on an arbitrary time of 1.5 seconds, which was the average time officers in his department needed to draw a service weapon from a duty holster and fire at a target in front of them. He (Lt. Tueller) then conducted some experiments and found that an individual armed with a knife could cover a distance of 21 feet from a standing start in that 1.5 seconds. That's where the magic "21-foot rule" comes from.

Lt. (probably Captain by now) Tueller developed this drill a number of years ago. LEO trainers tell me that the time required to draw from the newer, more secure retention holsters is longer than 1.5 seconds, and thus even for a human adversary, the 21-foot "rule" is no longer valid. If the average time to draw is up to 2.5 seconds, the distance is probably at least doubled. That's for uniformed officers carrying in a duty holster.

If the adversary is a hungry mountain lion as opposed to an average street punk, I think all bets are off. Some CCW holders who shoot in competition can draw in less than 2.5 seconds, but many CCW holders don't shoot in competition and probably can't draw, aim and fire in less than 3 to 5 seconds. And I'd guess that there are hiker folks who carry a pistol in a fanny pack or backpack and think that makes them "safe," even though it might take anywhere from 10 seconds to a minute to shrug off a backpack, unzip it, rummage around to find the gun, and get it out and aimed. 50 feet ain't hardly enough under such circumstances. 50 yards might be getting closer to it.

happy old sailor
March 10, 2006, 04:04 PM
was it the Lewis and Clark expedition that, then pres. Jefferson, sent west and told them to eat some everything and report on it. in their diary, they told that mountain lion was the tastiest. dont make me want any - but.............

some trappers of a couple centuries ago were reputed to eat skunk and enjoy it. personaly, i rank skunk right in there with possum. i know, some hungry day, i will be far from the store.

my Saints kill and eat EVERYTHING that ventures near the house, but leave dead possums in the driveway to show me they are on the job. if a dog wont eat it, i surely am not

if hungry, i would definately do a couger in and take a page from LnC. in case of really hungry, it might be polecat or possum.

for those who dont hunt with faster friends, go ahead. you shoot him in the leg.

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 04:10 PM
You're reading an awful lot into this without first-hand knowledge of that which you decry
Actually I do have first hand knowledge of these type of people. Every time I go on an expedition there are always a couple of these guys. And every time I go to a sportsman's show the place is crawling with them. Like I said, usually the loudest ones are the chubby little weasle-ish guys that have nothing to be proud of other than the fact they can kill an animal with a gun. I have nothing against necessary hunting, I even have no problem with the sporting side of it if it is not endangering a species, it is these guys with which my problem lies. And I just think the big stuffed trophies are gaudy. And it seems to me they are always posed like they were attacking. Why not pose them the way they were when they were shot. Standing in the distance without knowing you are even there.

M.E.Eldridge
March 10, 2006, 04:36 PM
If its legal and I see a mountain lion, I'd probably kill it and mount it. Why? Because I want to. I hunt coyotes all of the time. They rarely bother me, but its great fun hunting them. I did kill one with my SKS as it was attacking my dog, though.

I also shoot feral cats whenever I have a chance. According to Judd Cooney, they kill of more critters each year that any other animal around. Have no idea if this is true, but I can't stand the things.

About lions in WV, I'm positive that they're there. I haven't seen them, but when I was younger I spent alot of time with my uncle, who lived in West Virginia. I would go live with him for a couple weeks during the summer. It was basically like summer camp only with fishing, hunting, shooting and camping. Multiple times while in the woods we either heard their screams or saw their tracks and once foun a dead doe with tracks about it(I assume the mountain lion was munching on it, but don't know that it killed it).

PlayboyPenguin
March 10, 2006, 04:40 PM
There are big cats in WV. I lived there most of the first 17 yrs of my life and I can tell you they have been there for years. Very small numbers but the tracks were there and where there are tracks....I lived on a wildlife reserve near where the "mothman prophecies" was set.
Of course I also believe in the "Mothman".:D

If you enjoyed reading about "New twist on the Tueller drill!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!