| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Predator - prey relationships | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 25 2013, 12:39 AM (63,586 Views) | |
| Warsaw2014 | Jun 10 2017, 03:03 AM Post #256 |
|
Herbivore
  ![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)
|
Small,medium sized brown bear is better hunter than large one. "why lone brown bears can't take down healthy ungulate of that size? " On rare occasions take down healthy ungulate. http://shaggygod.proboards.com/thread/365/grizzly-bear-bison-relations |
 |
 
|
| A-Jay | Jun 10 2017, 03:38 AM Post #257 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
|
I didn't realize that. I suppose because small/medium bears can still run ungulate down. Large bears are too slow. I hear some of the larger ones only run at 20-25 mph. Definitely not catching healthy ungulate at that pace, although human is still toast  Thanks for the link Warsaw, I'll check that out. |
|
|
|
| Grazier | Jun 10 2017, 01:22 PM Post #258 |
|
Omnivore
|
Warsaw we seem to mostly be disagreeing on degrees of emphasis and I'm not too interested in nit picking over it. If you agree bears are considerably less of a threat to cattle than lions or tigers than that's really all I'm arguing. If you think I'm overstating the case a bit, fair enough, I have a tendency to do that in pursuit of making a point. But the point is still the point and it seems we're basically on the same page.
I mean the kilchers are not a unique case, there are tonnes of other people grazing free ranging cattle in brown bear country with success and reasonably low losses thoughout Alaska and Canada. One such family happens to have a TV show. My point about them though is if they can leave a decent sized herd of cattle alone in the wilderness, come back months later and see the odd grizzly walking around near the cattle, and then have zero losses, which often happens, that's pretty significant. I mean you couldn't leave steaks sitting out there and expect them not to be eaten, so bears obviously don't have such an easy time killing cattle. Which isn't to say even lions or tigers do, but I think there's no way you could do what the kilchers and many other Alaskan/Canadian families do in lion or tiger country and not have an unacceptably high number of losses. |
|
|
|
| Kazanshin | Jun 10 2017, 05:19 PM Post #259 |
Herbivore
|
He's not saying it can't, he's saying it doesn't because it doesn't need to. It can steal a kill from a wolf or simply eat something else since it's omnivorous. |
|
|
|
| Gyirin | Jun 10 2017, 10:16 PM Post #260 |
Omnivore
|
Would Siberian tiger prey on bisons if they are introduced to North America? |
|
|
|
| Taipan | Jun 10 2017, 10:33 PM Post #261 |
Administrator
|
Obviously yes, but that question does not belong in this thread. |
|
|
|
| Warsaw2014 | Jun 11 2017, 01:23 AM Post #262 |
|
Herbivore
|
"...Warsaw we seem to mostly be disagreeing on degrees of emphasis and I'm not too interested in nit picking over it. If you agree bears are considerably less of a threat to cattle than lions or tigers than that's really all I'm arguing. If you think I'm overstating the case a bit, fair enough, I have a tendency to do that in pursuit of making a point. But the point is still the point and it seems we're basically on the same page..." Off course ,bears are considerably less of a threat to cattle than lions or tigers . Mostly ,because bears are adapted to eating many types of food. "I mean the kilchers are not a unique case, there are tonnes of other people grazing free ranging cattle in brown bear country with success and reasonably low losses thoughout Alaska and Canada." : I don't think that cattle in brown bear country are usually less protected than cattle in Africa. "...In this study, the majority of livestock were lost at night when roaming outside of and away from protective bomas. Sixty four percent of all attacks occurred when livestock were left outside bomas at night. ..." "....We hypothesized that bells fitted to grazing livestock (as is common in southern Africa) might aid carnivores in locating and attacking unattended, grazing livestock..." Edited by Warsaw2014, Jun 11 2017, 01:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Mammuthus | Jun 12 2017, 12:25 AM Post #263 |
Proboscidean Enthusiast
|
Leopard killing a young rhino   Edited by Mammuthus, Jun 12 2017, 12:27 AM.
|
|
|
| SquamataOrthoptera | Jun 12 2017, 01:13 AM Post #264 |
15 year old keyboard warrior!
|
Feral Dogs interacting and hunting Wildlife.
|
|
|
|
| Grazier | Jun 12 2017, 08:15 AM Post #265 |
|
Omnivore
|
Cattle in general can't be well protected, unless they're being fed grain in enclosures or something. If they're grazing they're free ranging over pretty vast distances (approximately 100 acres per 15 head is required in even good soil areas with decent rainfall, much more in arid areas), essentially left to their own devices in the wilderness. A herd of 100 cattle, which is like a minimum for a grazier to make a living off of, need at the very least a square mile to survive and breed in, will usually have much more in less than perfect pastures. This amount of land is not something a human can "watch over", or listen over or anything of the sort. Cattle live, from a predator/prey standpoint, as wild animals that fend for themselves. The key difference between lion or tiger country, and brown bear country, is that the former is extremely limited and easy to avoid. If you live in western Canada or Alaska, you automatically live within brown bear country. I'm sure you know brown bear distribution maps better than anyone, but perhaps you don't quite understand the sad state of lion distribution? Lion distribution map (historic and current) These little spots are known to all graziers in Africa and are easy to avoid, most are protected parks. Lions aren't part of life for cattle in Africa, but brown bears are part of life for cattle in Alaska and Canada, and I imagine the cattle within the vast Eurasian range of brown bears too. It would be a huge area for graziers to avoid, they don't and it seems to be fine. |
|
|
|
| Warsaw2014 | Jun 12 2017, 09:21 PM Post #266 |
|
Herbivore
|
First of all. We agree that ,bears are considerably less of a threat to cattle than lions or tigers . Mostly ,because bears are adapted to eating many types of food. "Cattle in general can't be well protected, unless they're being fed grain in enclosures or something. If they're grazing they're free ranging over pretty vast distances (approximately 100 acres per 15 head is required in even good soil areas with decent rainfall, much more in arid areas), essentially left to their own devices in the wilderness. A herd of 100 cattle, which is like a minimum for a grazier to make a living off of, need at the very least a square mile to survive and breed in, will usually have much more in less than perfect pastures. This amount of land is not something a human can "watch over", or listen over or anything of the sort. Cattle live, from a predator/prey standpoint, as wild animals that fend for themselves." "...Not only have dogs saved ranchers money, they’ve also protected the very carnivores they were recruited to deter. In the United States, unruly fauna is controlled by Wildlife Services, a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture that kills millions of animals each year via methods including poisons, traps and aerial gunning. Although birds comprise the vast majority of those killings, over 75,000 coyotes — one every seven minutes — were slain in 2013. By deploying guard dogs and other deterrence techniques such as electric fencing and alarms, however, many ranchers have alleviated their predator problems without resorting to lethal tactics. “If a producer has a tool that prevents predators from killing their sheep, there’s no reason to kill those predators, or to have them killed by a federal agency,” says Julie Young, research wildlife biologist at the National Wildlife Research Center, Wildlife Services’ scientific arm..." http://www.hcn.org/articles/searching-for-the-best-dog-to-save-livestock-and-wildlife "but brown bears are part of life for cattle in Alaska and Canada" Look at this:  Now: Cattle Inventory: Ranking of all 50 states "Texas has the most cattle in the United States followed by Nebraska and Kansas. The cattle inventory in Texas is 11.8 million head, roughly 13% of all the cattle in the United States. Nebraska has 6.3 million head of cattle, slightly more than Kansas at 6 million head. Nearly 14% of the cattle in the United States are in Nebraska and Kansas. The top 10 states with the most cattle include: Texas, Nebraska, Kansas, California, Oklahoma, Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota, Wisconsin & Colorado. All states in the top 10 have more than 2.5 million head of cattle. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of the cattle in the United States are in the top 10 states. Rhode Island has the fewest cattle in the United States followed by Alaska and Delaware. Rhode Island has 5,000 head of cattle, less than .01% of the cattle in the United States. Texas has 369 times as many cattle as Rhode Island, Alaska and Delaware combined." 2016 STATE AGRICULTURE OVERVIEW Alaska https://www.nass.usda.gov/Quick_Stats/Ag_Overview/stateOverview.php?state=ALASKA Cattle, Incl Calves - Inventory ( First of Jan. 2017 ) 13,000 So ,Texas has 369 times as many cattle as Rhode Island, Alaska and Delaware combined., So Alaska has the second fewest cattle in the United States but you sais that "A lot of free ranging cattle in remote parts of alaska living side by side with huge numbers of grizzlies for months with no human contact" Naturally this is not true at all. " I'm sure you know brown bear distribution maps better than anyone, but perhaps you don't quite understand the sad state of lion distribution?" Ok some information from maps Grizzly bear distribution map (historic and current) Lion distribution map (historic and current) Mapping the Global Distribution of Livestock http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0096084 Figure 2. GLW 2 global distributions of a) cattle; b) pigs; c) chickens; and d) distribution of ducks, excluding South America and Africa. "The highest cattle densities (Figure 2a) are found in India, in the East African highlands (particularly in Ethiopia), in Northern Europe and in South America" Comparisions between distributions of cattle inAfrica ,USA ,Canada and lion-grizzly bear distribution  Finally Abstract: In Alberta, Canada (1982–2001), and in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, United States (1987–2001), wolves (Canis lupus) killed various domestic animals, among which the major prey were sheep in the United States (68%,n =494) and cattle in Canada (95%;n =1633). Under recovery programs, the wolf population increased in the United States, and depredation events increased proportionately. In both countries, the number of domestic animals killed each year was correlated with the number of wolves killed by government authorities for depredation management. We tested the ability of antiwolf barriers made of flags hanging from ropes to impede wolf access to food and livestock http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2003.00063.x/full "Traditionally barbed and woven wire materials have been used for beef cattle. However, barbed wire is not a recommended livestock fencing option because it is dangerous and likely to damage animals which come into contact with it. In addition, barbed wire fences require more maintenance and have a short lifespan. While slightly more expensive than barbed wire, woven wire fences can be a good option for cattle in some situations. Modifying woven wire fencing with one or two strands of electric fencing above the fence will make this design an effective physical and psychological barrier. Fence height should be a minimum 39 inches. Today, high-tensile electric fencing is proving to be the most popular choice for cattle. It can be used for both perimeter and interior fencing. Electric fencing for beef cattle centers around two main features – the fence wire and the charger. Certain factors must be considered when selecting the type of fence wire and the charger to be used." http://www.zarebasystems.com/learning-center/animal-selector/cattle I still hold my opinion that cattle in brown bear country (i.e lethal and non lethal tactics ,killing problem animal , guard dogs,electric fencing and alarms, etc) are usually not less protected than cattle in Africa. But once again.We agree that ,bears are considerably less of a threat to cattle (omnivore) than lions or tigers (pure meat eaters) |
|
|
|
| Grazier | Jun 12 2017, 11:31 PM Post #267 |
|
Omnivore
|
I first want to say I respect you a lot and have for a long time, but I'm saying that ofcourse because I'm about to criticise you, lol, just a little bit. You're posting a lot of quotes and links and graphs where I don't get what the point is? Maybe I'm the idiot, serioushavits possible, so for my benefit, if you could be so kind, perhaps follow your links and quotes and images with a little description from yourself how its relevant. Like the barbed wire fences and electric fences, what are you saying there? Do you really think they're for protection from predators? I hope not because that's very silly, they are purely for keeping cattle in. They serve no purpose against any predator, they could not even qualify as a speed bump. Also cattle density, like where there are lots of cattle, is this supposed to be saying something? What is it? There can only be cattle where there is people, ofcourse there is more cattle in India, Texas and south America than Alaska. There aren't many people in Alaska and much of the land is untamed wild forest with no grass and so ofcourse its not harbouring the kind of cattle density of places that have been deforested extensively for a long time to support the meat demands of huge human populations. Its not really relevant to what I was saying, the more you start talking about huge numbers of cattle the less you're talking about free ranging cattle anyway and more talking intensively stocked feedlot cattle protected from predators. Alaska, and canada, have a decent number, per capita of free range cattle graziers living amongst brown bears. Its a more personal closer inspection I am talking about here than a loose look at some vague statistics. I know graziers in Africa and at least get a bit of insight into how some graziers in Alaska coexist with brown bears via the various reality shows from akaska. Maybe not such a solid reference except when you understand how inclined they are to OVERstate the danger posed by predators for TV, a lot can be gleaned from how they operate given this fact, and helped along if you know a bit about how cattle production works generally. The African farmers I know are very understated no nonsense guys who tell it like it is. Even with this discrepancy, where you'd expect the dangers of grizzlies to be dramatically inflated over the dangers of lions, that's not how it plays out, quite the opposite where its clear lions just aren't feasible neighbours for cattle at all, while bears are manageable. What else is there? Well at one point you seem to be referring to other livestock and livestock guarding dogs, etc, that's a whole nother kettle of fish which is a totally different story, be it sheep, goats, pigs, hair sheep, alpacas, whatever. All these have a huge range of predators they need protection from in one way or another, cattle are a unique case. One that historically, and generally today too, have no need for livestock guardian dogs and aren't compatible with them for various reasons including their tendency to split up and again roam huge ranges. |
|
|
|
| Lycaon | Jun 13 2017, 02:20 PM Post #268 |
Omnivore
|
Dhole leaps head on at chital deer. That dhole was prepared to latch onto that deer at high speeds, it would have been great footage to see how it played out if it secured a hold. |
|
|
|
| Warsaw2014 | Jun 14 2017, 06:45 AM Post #269 |
|
Herbivore
|
In short. In Canada /USA wolves are the biggest problem to cattle ranchers. In Africa lions are the biggest problem to cattle ranchers. When the wolf population increased in the United States or Canada,depredation events increased proportionately. The same can be true for Africa. Unfortunately African lion populations are declining . "Indeed, cattle and the attitudes of their owners (not to mention the accompanying firepower) were major reasons that grizzly bears landed on the Endangered Species Act in 1975. In less than 150 years, European settlers extirpated 99% of grizzly bears in 98% of their range in the lower 48 states." Alaska, and canada, have a decent number, per capita of free range cattle graziers living amongst brown bears. For Alaska this is not true at all. " cattle are a unique case. One that historically, and generally today too, have no need for livestock guardian dogs and aren't compatible with them for various reasons including their tendency to split up and again roam huge ranges. " ? |
|
|
|
| Grazier | Jun 14 2017, 11:38 AM Post #270 |
|
Omnivore
|
Humans going off half cocked and eradicating a predator they perceive as a threat does not prove the animal actually was a threat. Here in Australia there was a bounty on Wedge tailed eagles as recently as the 60s (maybe 70s), which dramatically reduced their numbers and nearly rendered them extinct. Thankfully they are recovering well (I saw about 6 yesterday looking at rural real estate, incidentally, which was cool), but the dumbest part of all was the threat they posed to livestock was extremely negligible if not non-existent. Humans have a habit of shooting first and asking questions later. Ofcourse intuitively you'd assume your cattle were at great risk from grizzly bears, but all signs that I see suggest they actually aren't.
Well agree to disagree, there is no notable aversion to cattle production in Alaska, there are few people and not much in the way of improved pasture, the cattle numbers are perfectly in line with these factors. People, like the kilchers, are still grazing free ranging herds in grizzly country and suffering minimal losses.
Livestock guarding dogs evolved symbiotically with the domestication of sheep, they have no historical relationship with cattle. Cattle have always historically been unprotected, turns out they're quite good at protecting themselves. Today SOME people might keep LGDs with cattle but these are usually livestock guardian dog enthusiasts doing it essentially for fun. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Video & Image Gallery · Next Topic » |
6:34 PM Jul 13
