Florida might have a "mere" ESTIMATED hog population of about 500k - but superimpose Florida within the State of Texas. Florida, about a quarter of the size of Texas, has a big hog problem considering it's land area.
Last edited:
Hog Poison - Warfarin Failed, Now Sodium Nitrite Has Setback
- Thread starter Double Naught Spy
- Start date
- Status
Flintknapper
Member
Absolutely, I would readily concede that Florida has a hog problem. I was unable to find any recent studies for hog density in Florida, but a study done for Texas in 2012 suggested that about 80% of the land mass here is suitable for hog habitation. And given the estimated population at that time (6 years ago) the density (depending on location) varied from 9 to 16 hogs per square mile. With a projected 20% annual increase in population.
I'm not trying to make this a 'contest'. Suffice to say...that both States have very real feral hog troubles.
We've already gotten way off topic and onto tangents. My original point was simply: It is naive to think that any normal cross section of the hunting public is going to saunter onto someone's land and eradicate the hogs.
Land Owners know this. If it was that easy...they wouldn't have the hog problem to begin with. So they politely decline pompous offers from folks willing to come 'solve their problem'.
armoredman
Member
Dumb question - do the food banks take game-taken feral hogs?
alsaqr
Member
i've given lots of wrapped processed wild hog meat to OK food banks.
Flintknapper
Member
Not a dumb question at all. I can't speak to the situation in other States, but in Texas...it would be an arduous task.
It wouldn't be possible (legally) for a food bank to take direct possession of a meat resource (dead pig). Though a finished (inspected, certified, commercially produced) product 'could' be donated. Lots of regulations and hoop jumping.
http://www.tahc.state.tx.us/news/brochures/TAHCBrochure_FeralSwine.pdf
http://www.tahc.state.tx.us/animal_health/swine/MovementRegulations-LiveFeralSwine.pdf
"In Texas, an individual cannot donate live feral hogs or their meat to a food bank or non-profit organization; unless a pre-slaughter inspection and post-slaughter inspection is conducted by state and/or federal inspectors as required by state law.Dec 6, 2013"
https://www.chron.com/opinion/editorials/article/Feral-hogs-and-food-for-the-hungry-4264423.php
^^^^^^ Considering the potential for the spread of disease, it is both understandable and necessary for regulations to be in place. In Texas...it is taken very seriously.
alsaqr
Member
No one is "entitled" to hunt hogs on another persons property without permission.
i know numerous farmers and ranchers and have permission to hunt on three large properties in Oklahoma and one in Texas. Could have more property to hunt but i've never asked. You can't blame farmers and ranchers for refusing hunters permission to hunt hogs. i'm aware of several cases where a farmer/rancher gave a hunter permission to hunt; then the guy invited his buds. One rancher caught seven guys hunting without permission, all because he gave one hunter permission to hunt.
Never have i heard a farmer or rancher "whine" about wild hogs. Sometimes they mention hogs or hog damage, mostly in passing.
So far this spring i've killed 80-100 small pigs. Best to kill hogs while they are young and dumb.
i know numerous farmers and ranchers and have permission to hunt on three large properties in Oklahoma and one in Texas. Could have more property to hunt but i've never asked. You can't blame farmers and ranchers for refusing hunters permission to hunt hogs. i'm aware of several cases where a farmer/rancher gave a hunter permission to hunt; then the guy invited his buds. One rancher caught seven guys hunting without permission, all because he gave one hunter permission to hunt.
Never have i heard a farmer or rancher "whine" about wild hogs. Sometimes they mention hogs or hog damage, mostly in passing.
So far this spring i've killed 80-100 small pigs. Best to kill hogs while they are young and dumb.
MCgunner
Member
I do have neighbors that whine about the damage, but they're not ranchers, just recreational small property owners and I have permission to hunt on their properties for hogs. But, my kill zone is set up (feeder, box blind. 
) on my property.
) on my property.
OP
OP
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Danged straight!
Funny how many non-landowners think they should have access to what isn't theirs and that folks should not be able to complain about a problem. I have had people "help" me with hogs. They didn't really want to help me with my problem. They wanted to come in with some buddies to get away from home for the weekend as a mini vacation, shoot some, and leave. Yeah, they shot a couple hogs, but they really didn't help me with my problem. If you want to "help" a landowner, you need to earn that landowner's trust and then you need to be working that property on a regular basis, not just when you want to get away from the spouse for a night or two.
I hunt for other landowners and I don't pay for it. I am hitting their properties 1-3 times or more if there is an obvious ongoing problem. The squeaky wheel gets the attention, so-to-speak.
I have made offers to help out on a lot of properties and been turned down. As a landowner, I fully understand why. However, you get your foot in the door and do a good job for one property owner and he will tell his friends, or suggest people for you to contact and vouch for you. Like me, many ranchers have been burned by Johnny-come-lately hunters and really don't want to deal with the crap that comes with them.
Uh huh. And many of them politely accept money to let similar folk come and shoot a few hogs.
None of this is really off topic. There are a very limited number of options to pare down an enormous hog problem.
For me, it is unlikely I'll be doing any hog shooting - I am certainly not going to pay anyone money to help them with their "problem". But I would strongly oppose the use of poisons at all.
Well, sounds like there is no hog problem after all. So there is no need for any poisons.
ClickClickD'oh
Member
Hogs, like everything else that breathes, requires a hunting license, but unlike game animals, they aren't tag limited. You can shoot a thousand hogs a year if you wanted to.
So much THIS. If someone is on our ranch and they aren't a close personal friend, they need to be supervised and directed to protect us from liability. If I'm going to have to be out there supervising, I might as well shoot the hogs myself.. which I do by the dozens.
Our ranch stays pretty clear of hogs, but as fast as we kill them off, more push under the fence. The problem around us is mostly absentee land owners. People who live in the cities, but own some "retirement land" out in the country that the visit once a month or so. Those places are over run with hogs.
MCgunner
Member
Speedo66
Member
Contrary to what seems to be popular belief on this thread, you don't have to be a city person to be a moron or a slob hunter.
I've heard of plenty of "locals" who have no problem taking "sound" shots, i.e., shooting at an unseen sound, or performing other ridiculously unsafe actions. More locals are poachers, too, and feel entitled to hunt on others properties without permission. "We've always hunted here".
Re: poisons, I seem to remember there being similar problems out west with poisoning wolves. It wasn't just the wolves being killed.
I've heard of plenty of "locals" who have no problem taking "sound" shots, i.e., shooting at an unseen sound, or performing other ridiculously unsafe actions. More locals are poachers, too, and feel entitled to hunt on others properties without permission. "We've always hunted here".
Re: poisons, I seem to remember there being similar problems out west with poisoning wolves. It wasn't just the wolves being killed.
That makes it sound like many of the people who are wary of allowing strangers to come shoot on their land for free will change their mind if the person pays for the privilege--I'm sure it happens from time to time but it doesn't seem to be common at all. The people who are concerned about strangers shooting/hunting on their land are concerned about the possible negative issues that can arise from strangers shooting/hunting on their land, not about whether or not the strangers are paying.
There are certainly property owners who charge people for hunting rights, but those tend to be people who are using their land primarily to make money by charging hunters to hunt, those aren't just your average property owner who is trying to get rid of hogs. As far as I can tell, the majority of people who are trying to get rid of hogs aren't any more enthusiastic about paying strangers hunting on their land than they are about strangers hunting for free on their land.
Yes it sounds like it, and is. I am a landowner - without a hog problem. But if I had a hog problem that was costing me serious money I would not be waiting for people to pay money to help me with my problem.
In keeping with the topic - basically killing as many feral hogs as possible (in this case with poisons) - anyone with a hog problem has some choices to make. Those that do not have a hog problem and simply want to make extra money charging people to shoot hogs are not the topic of discussion here. Others have brought that category of landowner up, and I was simply pointing out that the risks associated with "strangers" shooting on your land is really no different whether they are paying, or not. You could extend it to "friends", "aquaintances", family et Al. The risks are still there.
So ultimately, having "strangers" shoot hogs to help you with a serious hog problem - for free - is really not any more risky than charging "strangers" money to help you with your serious hog problem.
Last edited:
That was the point of my post and the reason why I'm skeptical about the implication that there are "many" landowners with hog problems who won't let strangers shoot for free but are happy to have strangers come on their land if they pay for the privilege. That there are, as you claimed " many <who> accept money to let similar folk come and shoot a few hogs" but that otherwise wouldn't allow people to hunt on their land.
As you say, the risk is pretty much the same either way and it's the risk that is the main concern for the average landowner, not whether or not they're getting a few bucks out of the deal.
Speedo66
Member
Of course an added risk for a property owner is if someone is injured on your property, your insurance company may have a problem paying a claim if they consider your accepting money for hunting as running a hunting business, which you're probably not insured for.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
From Post #25, the Texas Observer link is a pretty-much even-handed article about the problem.
All in all, it looks like the idea of poison is no good. Hits unintended victims both directly from ingestion and indirectly from the meat from poisoned hogs.
All in all, it looks like the idea of poison is no good. Hits unintended victims both directly from ingestion and indirectly from the meat from poisoned hogs.
der Teufel
Member
So, if you offer a solution that you like, but the landowner doesn't like, then the landowner has to "shut up" and never complain because he wouldn't accept your solution?
Yeah, if I were king I'd go shoot hogs wherever I wanted. But, I'm not the king and the landowner is entitled to choose how he deals with his problems. And if he wants to complain, he can. You don't have to listen.
Ah, the devil's advocate. Not about a solution to their problem that "I like". It's about thinking you are going to get many people, if any, to help you with your problem, and asking them to pay you to help you. That's just the way the world works, whether you have a car problem, a sewer problem, roofing problem, an irrigation problem, a headache... or a hog problem. In my experience sometimes if you really have a problem, a real problem, you're often very lucky to get anyone at all to help you even if you do offer to pay *them* some money to help you.
So the complainers, whoever they are, can go on complaining if that makes them feel better. But it won't solve their "big problem".
In any case, I have come to believe that there is no "hog problem", reference previous posts by me and a few others above.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
It's possible to get back to the subject of the thread, if anybody remembers what it is.
JeffG
Member
It was inevitable, and predictable to have by-kill with any poison. In a very practical way, poison can't be dispensed and target one animal, much less several hundred animals that are not contained within an enclosure, without spillage, and exposure to non target animals. Just the way pigs move in and out of other species ecosystems exposes the whole area to exposure, including possible exposure to humans. Moving the same program on to a different poison, will only present the same set of problems; likely more unforeseen problems will present themselves.
- Status
