Another Mountain Lion Shot

[ozark trout fisher]

Yeah -- take a look at my factious post above and my serious one above that. Who's gonna be able to prove a vicious polecat didn't try to attack me? Or refute that my little kitten was eaten alive by one of these blood-thirsty monsters?

MDC is feeling their way through this and giving the benefit of the doubt where they can't prove otherwise. Sooner or later some knucklehead will blow his story, go to jail or get a hefty fine. In the meantime, the new will wear off, THR's will realize these things really don't pose a threat (like the folks out west do) and leave them the hell alone. It takes time.

Ness, I understand what the MDC is doing here, and in some ways I agree with you. But the problem with their strategy on this, and it's a big one, is that these trigger happy idiots are going to eradicate mountain lions from our state by the time the MDC acts, if they wait for the perfect scenario to finally do something. It's pretty incredible the rate at which these animals are being killed in Missouri, considering how few there are. So the time to act is now, if possible, before this situation gets even more out of hand.

[Al Agnew]

I don't think MDC has ever had any plans to reintroduce them, and to be honest they probably don't really want the headaches of having them. If they were serious about protecting them, they'd have regulations something like some Western states do on grizzlies. If you shoot one, and it looks like it was purely in self-defense, you're automatically on probation, and if you break one more game law in a ten year period you lose your hunting privileges, period. If you shoot one and it's proven NOT to be self defense, you're prosecuted.

I'm afraid, though, that the mountain lions are going to have to make it on their own in this state...I don't think they'll ever get any more serious protection than they have right now.

[troutfiend1985]

I think I'm going to call my local rep. Probably won't do anything, but it will at least let someone know that this is a crying shame.

[gwh]

Don't know the facts about this shooting, have not been able to find any details. Would like to see the MCD to post a report with the details, don't think that will happen. These animals are meat eaters looking for there next meal. There are a lot of fall calves on the ground now that will sell for +$1,000 next fall. Cattle men have to protect them. Once a wild amimal get a easly meal he comes back for more. 200 pound calves are easlier to catch than a deer. Someone posted that guns are not carried in the fields or pastures, they don't know me or my neighbors. Cannot tell you how many dogs that have been shot after they got a taste of beef.

[Outside Bend]

I think I'm going to call my local rep. Probably won't do anything, but it will at least let someone know that this is a crying shame.

It'd probably be more constructive to contact your regional conservation commissioner, I imagine their information is available on the

DC site.

Don't know the facts about this shooting, have not been able to find any details. Would like to see the MCD to post a report with the details, don't think that will happen. These animals are meat eaters looking for there next meal. There are a lot of fall calves on the ground now that will sell for +$1,000 next fall. Cattle men have to protect them. Once a wild amimal get a easly meal he comes back for more. 200 pound calves are easlier to catch than a deer. Someone posted that guns are not carried in the fields or pastures, they don't know me or my neighbors. Cannot tell you how many dogs that have been shot after they got a taste of beef.

I come from a family of cattle farmers, and I agree livestock owners should have some ability to protect their animals from depredation,-be it by coyotes, feral dogs, foxes, or other predators, including mountain lions. But I also think we've moved beyond the period where proactively shooting every animal that may possibly do harm to our livestock is irresponsible as well. MDC has to strike a balance between giving farmers a way of protecting their animals, while also protecting our native species, even if they're native species we're not particularly fond of.

Why not handle mountain lions the same way MDC handles other nuisance wildlife? If a farmer's grain is being ravaged by deer, he doesn't get to mow down every deer on his property under the guise of protecting his livelihood- they have to apply for depredation permits. Couldn't the same thing be done for mountain lions? If you have evidence of a lion on your property and feel endangered, you call MDC and the lion response team evaluates the situation, then determines whether to issue a depredation permit to the landowner.

Why not leave the discretion of whether to kill a lion up to the conservation agent or law enforcement officer, folks who are trained to deal with nuisance wildlife? Why not encourage landowners to contact MDC BEFORE a lion is shot, that way it could possibly be relocated as opposed to killed (move it back to NE, CO, wherever, or Peck Ranch, our state wilderness lands, etc). Plus live mountain lion specimens could probably help us better understand where they're coming from and what they're doing here than necropsy-ing dead specimens. At the very least, you can collar a live kitty and see where it's going and what it's doing, all information which would help understand and manage this species in the state.

[troutfiend1985]

It'd probably be more constructive to contact your regional conservation commissioner, I imagine their information is available on the

DC site.

I come from a family of cattle farmers, and I agree livestock owners should have some ability to protect their animals from depredation,-be it by coyotes, feral dogs, foxes, or other predators, including mountain lions. But I also think we've moved beyond the period where proactively shooting every animal that may possibly do harm to our livestock is irresponsible as well. MDC has to strike a balance between giving farmers a way of protecting their animals, while also protecting our native species, even if they're native species we're not particularly fond of.

Why not handle mountain lions the same way MDC handles other nuisance wildlife? If a farmer's grain is being ravaged by deer, he doesn't get to mow down every deer on his property under the guise of protecting his livelihood- they have to apply for depredation permits. Couldn't the same thing be done for mountain lions? If you have evidence of a lion on your property and feel endangered, you call MDC and the lion response team evaluates the situation, then determines whether to issue a depredation permit to the landowner.

Why not leave the discretion of whether to kill a lion up to the conservation agent or law enforcement officer, folks who are trained to deal with nuisance wildlife? Why not encourage landowners to contact MDC BEFORE a lion is shot, that way it could possibly be relocated as opposed to killed (move it back to NE, CO, wherever, or Peck Ranch, our state wilderness lands, etc). Plus live mountain lion specimens could probably help us better understand where they're coming from and what they're doing here than necropsy-ing dead specimens. At the very least, you can collar a live kitty and see where it's going and what it's doing, all information which would help understand and manage this species in the state.

Thanks for the info there OB.

Couldn't agree with you more about letting the MDC decide what happens to our wildlife instead of a single citizen. Like you said there has to be a balance, and what is happening right now is just not a vaible long term plan. Hopefully there will be some action on the part of MDC, but I think that we as citizens have inform the MDC of our concerns.

Does anyone know if this was a farmer in this situation?

[Al Agnew]

The livestock issue is another reason MDC probably would rather there not be mountain lions. While I don't know of any instances where it's been proven a mountain lion has killed cattle in this state in the last few years, and for some reason ranchers out West hardly ever seem to have problems with lions killing their livestock, it's still enough of a possibility, at least in the cattle growers' minds, that it would be a much bigger headache than the elk are. Elk might tear down a fence and eat hay, but they aren't big, mean carnivores.

Cougars make it pretty much on their own in the West. They have some protections but their biggest protection is in their ability to stay out of sight. Like I said before, I suspect they'll have to do the same in MO, a place where it's a lot more difficult to stay under the radar.

[Mark]

As someone who doesn't hunt and as a child, may have killed a total of 6 squirrels in my life, I just shake my head and smirk at mankind in general, and hunters in particular, on their attitudes and rationalizations toward wildlife. It's really hard to understand sometime.

Let's see.......

Mountain lions, GOOD.

Bobcats, BAD.

Wolves, GOOD.

Coyotes, BAD.

Dove, GOOD.

Pigeons, BAD.

Cattle, GOOD.

Wild boar, BAD.

Sitting out in the woods for hours waiting for a deer to wander along so you can use a sniper gun to kill it 1,000 yards away, GOOD.

Using a small pitchfork to kill a fish, BAD.

Please save the rationalizations

[ness]

I cannot believe what I'm reading!

You killed 6 adorable squirrels? Like the ones that sit up on their haunches, hold a peanut and cutely nibble away (before chewing a hole in the side of my house and turning my attic into their personal crapping ground/squirrel cub nursery)?

I shake my head and smirk at YOU sir!

Good day.

[Tim Smith]

The livestock issue is another reason MDC probably would rather there not be mountain lions. While I don't know of any instances where it's been proven a mountain lion has killed cattle in this state in the last few years, and for some reason ranchers out West hardly ever seem to have problems with lions killing their livestock, it's still enough of a possibility, at least in the cattle growers' minds, that it would be a much bigger headache than the elk are. Elk might tear down a fence and eat hay, but they aren't big, mean carnivores.

Cougars make it pretty much on their own in the West. They have some protections but their biggest protection is in their ability to stay out of sight. Like I said before, I suspect they'll have to do the same in MO, a place where it's a lot more difficult to stay under the radar.

I was friends with the USDA animal control officer in Mendocino County California when I lived out there. Mountain lions were thick in that area. Our crews saw several and we often encountered deer kills in the field. According to him mountain lions did sometimes attack livestock. Apparently they have a particular fondness for llamas. Also according to him (and he did this for a living so I assume he knows) with a good set of dogs it was a very simple matter to find and kill the offending cat. Only a small percentage of mountain lions ever became a problem and despite their high density in close proximity to livestock he was rarely on the job.

It doesn't take much to cope with these animals and there is a demonstrated willingness of conservation groups to help landowners deal with legitimate problems. Giving up a chance to reclaim a piece of your natural heritage makes no sense at all from the perspective of an outdoorsman. It's time for the state to get aggressive about this issue and start laying the ground work to lay the myths to rest, set a realistic standard for "self defense" and deal assertively with the few legitimate problems this putative "re-colonization" might entail for landowners and livestock owners.