Feral Hog Hunting? Trophy Hunt or Pest Elimination!

[Flintknapper]

Hahaha great idea, I just don't like to hunt and not eat it, I guess it something i picked up from my father.

And of course that makes sense with respect to sustenance hunting, but surely does not apply to most varmints or nuisance animals.

Another thing I think folks get hung up on...is the idea that something is 'wasted' if not consumed by humans.

The fact is....in many parts of the South (where pigs are exploding in population) you simply can not find enough needy people to give all the dead hogs to. In my State (Texas) there are very strict rules with what can be done with a dead hog anyway.

Coyotes, Fox, Hawks, Buzzards, etc.....all need to eat as well. The carcass does not go 'wasted' unless we define wasted as anything other than consumed by humans, which I refuse to do.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The folly in this example is that it is strictly controlled. NEVER in the wild is there 10 boars and ONE sow. Litters of feral hogs typically end 'about' 50/50 males to females. How many of either survive is up to chance of course.

But the females form sounders lead by an alpha 'Sow' and most do pretty well at keeping it all safe (if current numbers are any indication).

Mature boars are for the most part solitary and can (and will) breed multiple sows (when they are receptive). It's the reason you only need one herd bull (for a certain amount of cattle).And I can tell you that ranchers understand the value of the single bull for just that reason.

So using your same argument if you kill the ONE bull/boar (and no sows are currently pregnant) you likewise have no offspring. Of course that isn't happening either. IMO, boars are equally high value targets as are sows. There really isn't any reason to make argument for either. Kill them ALL....!

Frankly, the BEST pigs to kill are the youngest ones you can target (regardless of sex). Since they haven't yet had time to destroy everything they come across.

There is no folly. It is simple math. Because there is a nearly continuous supply of boars, killing a boar does not stop the baby factory females from going into production because it will be replaced by another boar. Killing the baby factory kills that line of production. Hence, boars are less value as targets in the reproductive chain.

One of the many reasons HogStop boar contraceptive isn't going to work at controlling the population is because all it takes is one boar to not be getting the bait to fertilize sows. In reality, lots of boars won't be getting the bait or not getting it regularly enough to remain at treatment level does because not enough landowners are going to use it regularly (or at all) to keep the boar population dosed. HogStop has to be consumed on a regular basis to attain and retain effectiveness....and it isn't inexpensive.

 

[Flintknapper]

Double Naught Spy wrote: There is no folly. It is simple math. Because there is a nearly continuous supply of boars, killing a boar does not stop the baby factory females from going into production because it will be replaced by another boar. Killing the baby factory kills that line of production. Hence, boars are less value as targets in the reproductive chain.

There is also a nearly continuous supply of Sows. The 'folly' and I mean no disrespect is when we try to 'mathematically' find a solution to the hog population, supposing that we are working under controlled conditions. If that were the case then eliminating all (or most of) either would work.

But we can't dispense with the breeding habits of hogs, density in certain areas or the plethora of other things that dictate what they do. All we really need to do is to look to nature who has already decided for us that they are of equal importance....and produces them in roughly equal amounts.

Animal husbandry tends to fly out the window (in the wild) where we can't strictly control the animals. Killing a sow that has already raised 6-7 litters doesn't do much to reduce the population either. You have killed the future potential....but in reality she has already guaranteed the survival of the herd.

So too, with the boars....the argument works both ways, it just takes one to cover a host of willing sows, so we don't want anymore of them roaming around than we have to have. BUT one boar is not going to find ALL the sows and can't cover ALL the territory they live in. This is where the 'real life' factor comes in.

So where do the prospects of these arguments cease to be circular? I say with what (mother nature says), they are of equal value in the scheme of things. I believe any efforts to kill one more than the other likely has no effect on the population long term. I will concede that if you are lucky enough to kill a sow with piglets 'on board' you have done us all a great and lucky service (short term), but at the same time....she wouldn't be 'carrying' had a boar not first been involved. You see how it goes round and round? Bottom line is...we are stuck with the damn things, kill all you can of any sex, any age.

One of the many reasons HogStop boar contraceptive isn't going to work at controlling the population is because all it takes is one boar to not be getting the bait to fertilize sows. In reality, lots of boars won't be getting the bait or not getting it regularly enough to remain at treatment level does because not enough landowners are going to use it regularly (or at all) to keep the boar population dosed. HogStop has to be consumed on a regular basis to attain and retain effectiveness....and it isn't inexpensive.
^^^^^
Yes, this will fail at every turn except to line the pockets of those marketing it (and they know it full well).

 

[Carl N. Brown]

They are an invasive species.
They destroy farmers' crops.
They destroy the environment for native species.
And they are sinfully ugly.
AS with king Aeetes in Jason and the Argonauts: "Destroy them... Kill... Kill! Kill! Kill them aLL!"
Or with Ripley: …I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

There is also a nearly continuous supply of Sows. The 'folly' and I mean no disrespect is when we try to 'mathematically' find a solution to the hog population, supposing that we are working under controlled conditions. If that were the case then eliminating all (or most of) either would work.

I really don't think you grasp population dynamics. I am not talking about controlled conditions. And No, eliminating all of most of either would not work. You and I both know you won't eliminate all of the hogs of either sex. We agree on that. It has to t be the females. A single male can impregnate multiple females that produce multiple litters in a very short period of time (say 5 days). So if you kill off a bunch of males but leave any behind, they are still going to get all the female pregnant when they come into heat. A female in only going to be pregnant, in the wild, no more than a couple of times a year (though based on the math and controlled conditions, it can be three times, but we aren't talking about controlled conditions). So if you cut back on population growth, it has to be with killing off the females.

Animal husbandry tends to fly out the window (in the wild) where we can't strictly control the animals. Killing a sow that has already raised 6-7 litters doesn't do much to reduce the population either. You have killed the future potential....but in reality she has already guaranteed the survival of the herd.

LOL, where I hunt, I am not seeing sows that old. We have killed them off.

 

[Kevinq6]

I like to hunt them, I prefer to pressure them so they don't get out of control and have something to hunt all year.

 

[The Glockodile]

Yep, that's how to "disappear" someone...

Even your bones are soft to them