Monday, February 22, 2016

Media and Republican Debates, Shameful

By Terry McGahey

After the last debate, and now with Donald Trump winning South Carolina, is it just me who feels that the Republican debates have been turned into a circus by the media and their so called moderators?

I don't know about you but when I watch the debates I expect to hear an honest discussion over the candidates policies, not the arguments over what he said or she said.

Ever since the very first debate and each one since, these debates have been more about character assassination than true substance of the issues that lay ahead for the next president of our country.

It's almost as though the media, including Fox, is trying to disrupt the Republican debates in order to have another Democrat voted into office. If that is not their intention then they are either blind, just plain stupid, or so biased that they should be banned from holding these debates.

Again, I don't know about you, but I would rather see the average American people asking these candidates the hard questions about their policies instead of the media promoting the circus which resembles the phony world of professional wrestling more so than the seriousness of electing our next president.

In reality, we only have three candidates in the Republican party who actually have a chance at winning the nomination, Trump, Cruz, and Rubio, in that order at this time. It is time that the RINOs like Bush step out because all they are doing is promoting more of the dissension which the media seems to be thriving upon.

It seems to me that the reason these other candidates are hanging in there, even though they don't stand a chance, is to attack Trump because the establishment of good old boy's within the GOP can't control the man, and they are afraid of a non-establishment president who will not follow their own policies of hypocrisy.

Yes, I am for Trump, and the reason being is simple. I am sick and tired of professional politicians who promise the world but yet deliver nothing but token policies which have done nothing to bring better paying jobs back to this country, as well as allowing our Constitution to be slowly eroded over these past many years. And do not fool yourself, both sides of the isle have been allowing this to happen.

The only difference is that the Democrat progressives have made it happen in a more aggressive manner while the RINO Republicans have done little more than stand back and watch it take place. Enough is enough!

No matter the outcome we the people are just as much to blame as the media when it comes to the debates and nomination process. On Facebook as well as other outlets, I notice that people who do stand on the side of the Republican isle are also calling the candidates whom they do not support names and other horrible things.

It's time to stop the name calling because someone changed their opinion on a certain subject or policy over the years, human nature is to grow, and each and every one of us has changed our outlook on a certain subject at one time or another during our lifetime as well.

No matter if you agree with me or not that is your right, but please understand this. No matter who wins the Republican nomination, be it Trump, Cruz, or Rubio, we will have no choice but to vote for that person if we want to keep the self proclaimed socialist, Bernie Sanders, or the proven lying, cheating, elitist, Hillary Clinton, out of the White House.

With that in mind lets look at some of the positive sides of the top three candidates instead of only the negative sides. So yes, by all means stand by your candidate, but remember this, we may have to vote for one of the others before this is over.

I don't know about you, but that's the way I see it.
Terry McGahey



Sunday, February 21, 2016

Obama Proves Himself To Be A Very Small Man

Antonin Scalia was born on March 11th, 1936, and died in his sleep from natural causes on the night of February 12th or the morning of February 13th, 2016, following an afternoon of quail hunting and dining at the Cibolo Creek Ranch in Shafter, Texas.

Antonin Scalia was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan in 1986, and served until his death a few days ago. Yes, Justice Scalia served on the Court for nearly 30 years.

Justice Scalia has been described as an American patriot, a lifelong Conservative, a defender of the Constitution. He espoused a Conservative jurisprudence and ideology, advocating textualism in statutory interpretation and originalism in Constitutional interpretation.

So yes, for the last 30 years he was the intellectual anchor for the originalist and textualist position in the Court's Conservative wing. 

What does that mean? That means he was a strict Constitutionalist who believed that the Constitution of the United States is a legal document and should be taken as such. It is a contract between the government and Americans citizens. It directs what the government can and cannot do in extremely plain language. It is what it is and shouldn't be twisted or spun to mean something that it does not say.


Yesterday, Americans paid their final respects to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in a Catholic Mass funeral in Washington D.C. that celebrated the Conservative Justice's devotion to his faith and family.

Justice Scalia's flag-draped casket was brought to the church Saturday morning, in a short trip from the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill where it had been laying in repose. In fact, his casket in repose rested on a funeral bier that first held President Abraham Lincoln's casket after his assassination.

His sons and his sons-in-law served as pallbearers carried the casket into and out of the basilica which is our nation's largest Roman Catholic church. In additon to his wife of 55 years and their nine children and dozens of grandchildren, other dignitaries at the service included Vice President Joe Biden, former Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, 95-year-old retired Justice John Paul Stevens, the remaining eight Supreme Court Justices, members of Congress, several federal judges. and thousands of others.

One of Justice Scalia's sons, the Rev. Paul Scalia, a Catholic priest serving the diocese of Arlington, Virginia, led the service at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington. Never before had a funeral for a Supreme Court Justice been held at the Basilica.

Rev. Paul Scalia shared some personal moments about his father's life. He talked about his dad's faith, stating, "The deeper he went in his faith, the better public servant he was. God bless dad for his love of his family." And yes, at one point he said "God bless dad for his faith."  

Justice Clarence Thomas read from the New Testament. And no, there was no eulogy in a service which was free of partisan politics. Although, his son, 

Though President Obama and his wife Michelle were among the more than 6,000 people who paid their respects to Justice Scalia at the Supreme Court building on Friday, President Obama did not attend his funeral. Yes, to me, that was a classless act. 

White House spokesman Josh Earnest tried to excuse Obama's classless act to purposely not go to the Conservative Supreme Court Justice's funeral, saying that it was a "respectful arrangement" that took into account Obama's large security detail. Of course, he did not address how George W. Bush could attend a funeral with his security detail when he was president but Barack Hussein Obama couldn't? 

And yes, that leads us to other things that really don't make much senses. For example, this week Hookers in Nevada came out to say they support Hillary Clinton. Someone on the radio asked if it was a matter of Professional Courtesy? I believe they have so much in common. After all, the only question is price. 

Bernie Sanders being  a Socialist is not news. But frankly, what should be news is Sanders' being exposed as full blown Communist with actual ties to Communist organization sworn to work toward the overthrow of the United States,  Of course, it might matter, if only his supporters really understood what that really means? Which they don't! 

Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer of New York came out saying that Obama should nominate a replacement for Justice Scalia even if Obama only has 10 months left in office. This is a 180 degree turn around from what Schumer said in 2007 when he demanded that George W. Bush be banned from nominating a replacement Justice when he had a year and a half left in office. 

Hillary and Schumer and Obama are all on video opposing Justice Alito's nomination. Obama having the distinction of being the only president to oppose a Justice nominee and have to nominate a Justice later -- then ask that his nominee not be opposed.  

Yes, Hillary and Schumer and Obama, all attempted a filibuster against Justice nominee Samuel Alito. Yes, back in 2006, then-Senator Obama said that he "disagreed with the premise that a president’s nomination to the Supreme Court (or any federal court) should be confirmed just because he won an election."

Now, ten years later, Obama is singing a different tune. He now says that blocking judicial nominations isn’t how our system of government is supposed to work. As if Obama knows how our system works? This from a man who has circumvented our legislative process and instead has tried to "rule" as some sort of Dictator or King with edicts in the form of executive orders. 

Obama said that he would not make a recess appointment, but he would nominate somebody who would be "indisputably" qualified and whom "any fair-minded person -- even somebody who disagreed with my politics -- would say would serve with honor and integrity on the court."

This comes from a man who sees political gain where he can get it. This coming from a man who found time to meet and celebrate the "work" of a Hate Group known as Black Lives Matters. Yes, a Hate Group which advocates the killing of Cops and White Americans.

Frankly, Obama has no knowledge of what honor and integrity means. Obama doesn't have the class to put politics aside and attend a Supreme Court Justice's funeral. He is pathetic!

And frankly, it is a shame that Obama didn't have enough class to put aside politics and morn a great American who gave nearly 30 years of service to America. With this last classless act, the act of showing that 30 years of service as one of nine Supreme Court Justices means nothing just because Justice Scalia was a Conservative, Obama has proven himself to be such a very small man. Yes, Obama is a very very small man. 

Obama has shown himself to be just like the Black Lives Matters hate group's lowlifes which he whole heartily supports. He is just full of hate and bigotry. He is just a pathetic Democrat politician who has proven to America once and for all that he is indeed just a very small man.

UPDATE:

After posting this late last night, I have been bombarded by hate mail from Liberals who love Obama and praise what he has done while in office. I have been called all sorts of names including of course a racist. 

One Obama supporter wrote to tell me that the world is full of many types of people, and that they don't always act as I would like them to act. And yes, she said that I should be more understanding about the ways of others. 

Allow me to make something very clear. While the world is indeed full of many types of people, Obama and any sitting President is EXPECTED to act in certain ways. Just as they need to be honest and be truthful, have honor and integrity, they also need to be bigger than what Obama has shown to be! 

If you have to ask why? Frankly, if that's the case and you who support Obama truly do not understand why any sitting President need to be bigger than petty politics -- then there is no way to explain to you why. 

But understand this, they need to be honest and truthful, have honor and integrity, and be bigger than what Obama has shown to be -- if for any other reason, to help set the right direction for our nation's moral compass. 

Like it or not, as a nation, we must demand that the President, whether it be a man or woman from either political party, should have enough class to put aside political differences and show up at the funeral of a Supreme Court Justice. We should not give Obama a pass because he's Black or a Democrat, but then demand that a Republican or a White man or woman must act in a different way.

The president owns his policies and actions. He or she can act wise or dumb, naive or worldly, for American interest or not, all they want. But, like it or not, there are things We The People have to demand in the ways our presidents act. We must demand that he properly salutes those in uniform, that he works in the interest of our nation, that he preforms his duties according to the Constitution with decorum in a dignified manner.

In other words, conduct and appearance which our nation can see is in good taste. It is about the appropriateness of behavior or conduct. It is about propriety. It is about the actions of our president which are required in polite behavior.

In this case, Obama has should his true colors, he has again acted in an undignified manner while presenting to our nation his hate, his bigotry, his disrespect for others not Black or Democrat. 

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Friday, February 19, 2016

Jack Slade -- Hanged For Being Too Mean


Joseph Alfred "Jack" Slade was a stagecoach and Pony Express superintendent. He was instrumental in the opening of the American West. And though some say that he was an Old West gunfighter, there is very little evidence to confirm that.

He was born on January 22nd, 1831 and was hanged on March 10th, 1864. Yes, Jack Slade was indeed hanged because the townsfolk of Virginia City, Montana, thought he was simply too darn mean and nasty -- and even worse when drunk.

He is the only man that I've ever heard of to be hanged and yet never broke a law. Instead, he was hanged for reasons of being too bad an hombre.

Below is what Western Historian, American Writer, Emerson Hough said about Jack Slade in his book The Story of the Outlaw. That book, one of 34, was first published by the Curtis Publishing Co. in 1905, and then published again by the Outing Publishing Company, New York, in 1907.

Joseph A. Slade
by Emerson Hough, 1907

One of the best-known desperadoes the West ever produced was Joseph A. Slade, agent of the Overland Stage Line on the mountain division, about 1860, and in charge of large responsibilities in a strip of country more than six hundred miles in extent, which possessed all the ingredients for trouble in plenty.

Slade lived, in the heyday of his career, just about the time when men from the East were beginning to write about the newly discovered life of the West.

Bret Harte had left his indelible stamp upon the literature of the land, and Mark Twain was soon to spread widely his impressions of life as seen in "Roughing It"; while countless newspaper men and book writers were edging out and getting hearsay stories of things known at first hand by a very few careful and conscientious writer.

The hearsay man engaged in discovering the West always dung to the regular lines of travel; and almost every one who passed across the mountains on the Overland stage line would hear stories about the desperate character of Slade. These stories grew by newspaper multiplication, until at length the man was owner of the reputation of a fiend, a ghoul, and a murderer. There was a wide difference between this and the truth. As a matter of fact, there were many worse desperadoes on the border.

Slade was born at Carlisle, Illinois, and served in the Mexican War in 1848. He appears to have gone into the Overland service in 1859. At once he plunged into the business of the stage line, and soon became a terror to the thieves and outlaws, several of whom he was the means of having shot or hung, although he himself was nothing of a man-hunter at the time; and indeed, in all his life he killed but one man-a case of a reputation beyond desert, and an instance of a reputation fostered by admiring but ignorant writers.

Slade was reported to have tied one of his enemies, Jules Beni, more commonly called Jules, to the stake, and to have tortured him for a day, shooting him to pieces bit by bit, and cutting off his ears, one of which he always afterward wore in his pocket as a souvenir. There was little foundation for this reputation beyond the fact that he did kill Jules, and did it after Jules had been captured and disarmed by other men.

But he had been threatened time and again by Jules, and was once shot and left for dead by the latter, who emptied a pistol and a shotgun at Slade, and left him lying with thirteen bullets and buckshot in his body. Jules thought he did not need to shoot Slade any more after that, and gave directions for his burial as soon as he should have died.

At that Slade rose on his elbow and promised Jules he would live and would wear one of his, Jules', ears on his watch chain; a threat which no doubt gave rise to a certain part of his ghastly reputation. Jules was hung for a while by the stage people, but was let down and released on promise of leaving the country never to return. He did not keep his promise, and it had been better for him if he had.

Jules Beni was a big Frenchman, one of that sort of early ranchers who were owners of small ranches and a limited number of cattle and horses -- just enough to act as a shield for thefts of livestock, and to offer encouragement to such thefts. Before long Jules was back at his old stamping-grounds, where he was looked on as something of a bully; and at once he renewed his threats against Slade.

Slade went to the officers of the military post at Laramie, the only kind of authority then in the land, which had no sort of courts or officers, and asked them what he should do. They told him to have Jules captured and then to kill him, else Jules would do the same for him. Slade sent four men out to the ranch where Jules was stopping, about twelve miles from Laramie, while he followed in the stagecoach. These men captured Jules at a ranch a little farther down the line, and left him prisoner at the stage station.

Here Slade found him in the corral, a prisoner, unarmed and at his mercy, and without hesitation he shot him, the ball striking him in the mouth. His victim fell and feigned death, but Slade -- who was always described as a good pistol shot -- saw that he was not killed, and told him he should have time to make his will if he desired.

There is color in the charge of deliberate cruelty, but perhaps rude warrant for the cruelty, under the circumstances of treachery in which Jules had pursued Slade. At least, some time elapsed while a man was running back and forward from the house to the corral with pen and ink and paper. Jules never signed his will.

When the last penful of ink came out to the corral, Jules was dead, shot through the head by Slade. This looks like cruelty of an unnecessary sort, and like taunting a helpless victim; but here the warrant for all the Slade sort of stories seems to end, and there is no evidence of his mutilating his victim, as was often described.

Slade went back to the officers of Fort Laramie, and they said he had done right and did not detain him. Nor did any of Jules' friends ever molest him. He returned to his work on the Overland.

After this he grew more turbulent, and was guilty of high-handed outrages and of a general disposition to run things wherever he went. The officers at Fort Halleck arrested him and refused to turn him over to the stage line unless the latter agreed to discharge him. This was done, and now Slade, out of work, began to be bad at heart. He took to drink and drifting, and so at last turned up at the Beaverhead diggings in 1863, not much different from many others of the bad folk to be found there.

Quiet enough when sober, Slade was a maniac in drink, and this latter became his habitual condition. Now and again he sobered up, and he always was a business man and animated by an ambition to get on in the world.

He worked here and there in different capacities, and at last settled on a ranch a dozen miles or so from Virginia City, Montana, where he lived with his wife, a robust, fine-looking woman of great courage and very considerable beauty, of whom he was passionately fond; although she lived almost alone in the remote cabin in the mountains, while Slade pursued his avocations, such as they were, in the settlements along Alder Gulch.

Slade now began to grow ugly and hard, and to exult in terrorizing the hard men of those hard towns. He would strike a man in the face while drinking with him, would rob his friends while playing cards, would ride into the saloons and break up the furniture, and destroy property with seeming exultation at his own maliciousness.

He was often arrested, warned, and fined; and sometimes he defied such officers as went after him and refused to be arrested. His whole conduct made him a menace to the peace of this little community, which was now endeavoring to become more decent, and he fell under the fatal scrutiny of the vigilantes, who concluded that the best thing to do was to hang Slade.

He had never killed anyone as yet, although he had abused many; but it was sure that he would kill someone if allowed to run on; and, moreover, it was humiliating to have one man trying to run the town and doing as he pleased. Slade was to learn what society means, and what the social compact means, as did many of these wild men who had been running as savages outside of and independent of the law.

Slade got wind of the deliberations of the committee, as well he might when six hundred men came down from Nevada Camp to Virginia City to help in the court of the miners, before which Slade was now to come.

It was the Nevada Camp Vigilantes who were most strongly of the belief that death and not banishment was the proper punishment for Slade. The leader of the marching men calmly told Slade that the Committee had decided to hang him; and, once the news was sure, Slade broke out into lamentations.

This was often the case with men who had been bullies and terrors. They weakened when in the hands of a stronger power. Slade crept about on his hands and knees, begging like a baby. "My God! My God!" he cried. "Must I die? Oh, my poor wife, my poor wife! My God, men, you can't mean that I'm to die!"

They did mean it, and neither his importunities nor those of his friends had avail. His life had been too rough and violent and was too full of menace to others. He had had his fair frontier chance and had misused it. Some wept at his prayers, but none relented.

In broad daylight, the procession moved down the street, and soon Slade was swinging from the beam of a corral gate, one more example of the truth that when man belongs to society he owes duty to society and else must suffer at its hands. This was the law.

Slade's wife was sent for and reached town soon after Slade's body was cut down and laid out. She loaded the vigilantes with imprecations, and showed the most heartbroken grief. The two had been very deeply attached. 'She was especially regretful that Slade had been hanged and not shot. He was worth a better death than that, she protested.

Slade's body was preserved in alcohol and kept out at the lone ranch cabin all that winter.

In the spring it was sent down to Salt Lake City and buried there. As that was a prominent point on the overland trail, the tourists did the rat. The saga of Slade as a bad man was widely disseminated.

-- end 1907 article by Emerson Hough.

Joseph Alfred "Jack" Slade, was born in Carlyle, Illinois, he was the son of Charles W. Slade and Mary Kain Slade. At the age of 16, young Jack went off to serve in the U.S. Army in the unit that occupied Santa Fe from 1847 to 1848 during the Mexican War. And yes, about 10 years later, he is said to have married Maria Virginia in 1857.

In the 1850s, Slade was a freighting teamster and a wagon master along the Overland Trail. After that he became a stagecoach driver in Texas in around the years 1857 and 1858.

He is said to have become a stagecoach division superintendent along the Central Overland route for Hockaday & Co. from 1858 to 1859, and its successors Jones, Russell & Co. in 1859, and then the Central Overland, California & Pike’s Peak Express Co. from 1859 to 1862. While with the Central Overland, he helped launch and operate the Pony Express from 1860 to 1861.

As holding the position of Superintendent, he enforced order and assured reliable cross-continental mail service, maintaining contact between the East and California during the moments leading up to the American Civil War.

It is true that while Division Superintendent in May 1859, he did shoot and kill Andrew Ferrin who was one of his subordinates. The reason, he felt Ferrin was hindering the progress of a freight train. 

At the time, shooting deaths of this kind in the West were rare and Jack Slade's reputation as a "gunfighter" spread rapidly across the country. Of course the shooting was ruled "self-defense."

In March 1860, Slade was ambushed and left for dead by Jules Beni who was indeed a corrupt station keeper at Julesburg, Colorado, whom Slade had fired. Then to the surprise of many, Slade survived the attack by Beni. In August 1861, Beni was killed by Slade's men after ignoring Slade's warning to stay out of his territory.

Slade's exploits spawned numerous legends, many of them false. His public image was not helped by the exaggerations of none other that famous tall tale writer Mark Twain in his story "Roughing It".

As with many of the exaggerated claims of people such as Billy The Kid, Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday, and Wild Bill, Slade's record as a vicious killer of up to 26 victims was pure exaggeration. Believe it or not, only one killing, that of Andrew Ferrin, is really verifiable fact. 

But as for his reputation as someone who you wanted to stay on his good side because of his horrible anger, that was something that is said to be true. And yes, his anger was only increased when combined with drinking too much. His legendary anger and his boozing were his downfall.

Both issues lead to his being fired by the Central Overland in November 1862. And yes, on March 10, 1864, during a drunken spree when he let his demons get the best of him in Virginia City, Montana, he was in fact lynched by local Vigilantes. They did in fact hang him for "disturbing the peace." 

Though he was buried in Salt Lake City, Utah, on July 20, 1864, he was not forgotten. Fact is, like Wild Bill, Jack Slade was a legend in his own time. And yes, like Wild Bill, his legend also grew to exaggerated proportions after his death. 

But frankly, that Jack Slade became even bigger in death should not surprise anyone. He lived in a time where the hard to tame in fact tamed a wilderness. He was one of a rare breed of men who fought to do things that others didn't have the stones to do. And yes, while some say he was the devil incarnate, others saw him as a man who was in fact a force to be reckoned with if they didn't do the job he demanded. 

All in all, who knows what personal demons drove him to drink in excess -- or what fueled his rage? Whatever it was, it would forever be a mystery because of a group of vigilantes who decided that banishment would be too good for the threat they called Jack Slade. 

After posting this, a reader wrote to say: "The negative aspects of Slade are easy to find. But one winter the supplies for Virginia City were left on the banks of the Missouri by a steamboat captain who did not want to contend with the Blackfeet any more. Slade put together a supply train and went clear up to the Missouri, in winter, with marauding Indians to deal with, and brought the supplies back, effectively saving Virginia City from at least very hard times if not survival itself."

He's right. Yet those same people hanged him. And that is, to my way of thinking, a sad commentary on who they were.

Tom Correa



Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Florida Sheriff: “My support of Open Carry goes even deeper”

Sheriff Wayne Ivey
by Sheriff Wayne Ivey

As each of us watches with astonishment at what is currently taking place across our country, we struggle to find solutions to reduce the potential for the next active shooter or violent crime that could take place in our own communities. 

Shootings and mass killings at churches, movie theaters, schools, malls, military bases, and even colleges have forever changed the game and have left Law Enforcement and law abiding citizens scrambling for an answer to prevent the next critical incident.

 While there are many opposing opinions, personal views and empirical data reflecting respective positions, there is only one undisputed fact: the best law enforcement agencies in the country have response times in minutes and bad people with evil intentions act in seconds.

Like each of you, I strongly support our Constitution and have unwavering support for the 2nd Amendment. There is no doubt that historians and legal minds often disagree on the intentions and interpretations of the 2nd Amendment, however, most will agree that the true essence of the 2nd Amendment was to allow people the right to bear arms to protect themselves.

While the Constitution lays the foundation for “the right to bear arms,” my support of Open Carry goes even deeper. Our jobs as Law Enforcement Officers is to prevent, investigate, and solve crimes while doing everything we can to legally protect our citizens.

We stress to our citizens every day the importance of making themselves, their homes, and their businesses “hard” targets so that criminals will not target them or their families. Violent criminals are opportunists, who look for an easy or “soft” target to victimize.

For decades Law Enforcement agencies have instructed citizens to put alarm signs out front of their homes and businesses to deter criminals. In fact, most agencies will even instruct citizens to prominently place an alarm sign at their location even if they don’t have an alarm. Why? Because we are trying to make their homes and businesses hard targets and not soft targets.

The same theory applies to open carry when we are trying to protect our citizens. I don’t want our citizens to have to defend an attack that could have easily been avoided had they been able to clearly demonstrate to a waiting criminal that they are a hard target and not a soft target.

 To emphasize this point, I ask you to consider that each and every day across our country we investigate robberies at restaurants, banks, drug stores, gas stations, convenience stores and homes, but what we don’t see are armed robberies at pawn shops and gun stores. The reason why is very simple—because criminals know what awaits them on the other side of the counter!

A historical survey performed by the University of Massachusetts and funded by the U.S. Department of Justice gives great credibility to the above philosophy and concept. The survey involved the interviews of over 1,800 violent inmates from 10 different states including Florida who were asked questions concerning target selection and how they picked their victims.

To this day it is still considered to be one of the most comprehensive studies conducted with criminals who gave first-hand accounts of what criminals consider when committing crimes. The study revealed the following:
  • 81% of interviewees agreed that a “smart criminal” will try to determine if a potential victim is armed.
  • 74% indicated that burglars avoided occupied dwellings because of fear of being shot.
  • 57% said that most criminals feared armed citizens more than the police.
  • 40% of the felons said that they have been deterred from committing a particular crime, because they believed that the potential victim was armed.
  • 57% of the felons who had used guns themselves said that they had encountered potential victims who were armed.
  • 34% of the criminal respondents said that they had been scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed citizen.
Based on this government-funded research, it would appear that known armed citizens do represent a direct deterrent effect on crime. Our citizens deserve the right to demonstrate that they have the ability to protect themselves. At the very least they deserve the choice to reveal themselves as a hard target and not a soft target.

 I challenge you to find a single Law Enforcement Officer or Sheriff in our state that doesn’t believe that a criminal is less likely to target a victim whom they know is armed and prepared. If you know in your heart this is a true statement, then how can we as law enforcement leaders deny a citizen the right to demonstrate that they have the ability to protect themselves?

Lastly, there are 45 other states in our country that have “some” form of open carry. There is no question that “Open Carry” will eventually occur in Florida. The overall design and intent of HB 163 and SB 300 is to mandate the same statutory requirements, regulations, qualifications and restrictions that currently apply to the Florida Concealed Carry Permit such as safety training, weapon handling proficiency, background check, permitted areas of carry, and psychological well being.

I personally believe it is imperative that we as law enforcement leaders express a clear and convincing voice in the design and potential impact of this bill. By sitting at the table with the various groups that want to discuss this important issue, we can work together to draft legislation that is designed to protect our citizens, our protectors and our Constitutional Rights.

To simply stand idly by and say we either agree or disagree does absolutely no service for our employees and citizens. We as law enforcement leaders should be standing and proudly voicing our desire to ensure that all legislation meets the number one priority of government, to protect its citizens. By not only having a voice, but exercising that voice in the drafting of this bill, we can make sure we create positive laws that are in the best interest of our citizens and our Law Enforcement members.

-- end article. 

Editor's Note:

Sheriff Wayne Ivey has been a Law Enforcement Officer for over three decades. Sheriff Ivey is a graduate of the FBI National Academy and has a Bachelor’s Degree from Daytona State College in Management and Supervision. Sheriff Ivey’s background in law enforcement is inclusive of Management, Criminal Investigations, Narcotics, Patrol Services, Public Integrity Investigations, and Corrections.

Prior to being elected in 2012, Sheriff Ivey served the citizens of the State of Florida as a Resident Agent in Charge for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. As a member of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Sheriff Ivey developed and created the country’s first ever statewide Task Force on Identity Theft.

Also in 2012, the Task Force was named one of the top five most innovative programs in the country by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and investigated approximately 44 million dollars in fraud cases. Additionally, as a member of FDLE, Sheriff Ivey created the Child Abduction Response Team (C.A.R.T) that re-defined the way Child Abduction cases are conducted throughout the country today. The program was later selected as the most innovative program in the country by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and is now used as a nationwide model in the response and investigation of child abductions.

Sheriff Ivey has testified before the United States Congress on law enforcement related matters and has extensive experience in the area of Public Integrity Investigations. Sheriff Ivey was honored as the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s Special Agent of the Year (1996) and was also recognized by the Commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for his Outstanding Contributions to Criminal Justice. 

In August of 2011 Sheriff Ivey was honored by the National Organization of Victims Advocacy for his work at the national level as an advocate of victim’s rights and protection.

Sheriff Ivey speaks regularly on topics such as Identity Theft, Crime in America, Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence, and Self Defense through Mental Preparedness. Sheriff Ivey firmly believes that Crime Prevention and Education are vital to reduce our crime rate and protect our community.

The above article was written on October 22nd, 2015. I posted it here because Sheriff Wayne Ivey makes a number of great points. While some do not agree with the views and opinions expressed by Sheriff Ivey, I do.

My thanks goes out to Sheriff Ivey for coming forward to give Americans sound advice.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa
Editor
The American Cowboy Chronicles

Monday, February 15, 2016

Wild Longhorns

By Terry McGahey

Several years ago in the mid 90s a good friend of mine by the name of Jeff took over managing a ranch called the Cobra, near Klondike Arizona.

This ranch was literally about sixty miles of dirt road North West of Wilcox near the entrance of the Araviapa Canyon wilderness, and the headwaters of the Araviapa creek began there.

The ranch was first settled sometime around 1867 and we were told by the owner that at one time Tom Horn had either been working the ranch or had another one near by for a short period of time. I never knew which for sure although it is on record that Tom Horn did have a ranch in that area.

Jeff asked me if I could come out and help him with the place, so being my good friend I took the job. At that time the place had been let go for the most part for about five or six years other than a caretaker who watched over the place, and had about thirty head of longhorns who hung around not far from the ranch house because he would feed hay from the back of his pickup.

When I got there the place was a mess, the working pens were shabby, fences were down, and we had no idea how many cows were on the place. By the owners estimate, he thought maybe 150 head or so. He was about to loose his leases so we had to get that place straightened out.

The first several days was just figuring out the lay of the land from topographic maps. With the deeded property, state leases, and federal forest leases, Best I recollect, it covered about 53 thousand acres with all combined. Now understand, this was not flat land. There were some flat areas but just a few, the majority of this place was mountainous.

The place was also over run with critters such as rattlesnakes, Javelinas, coatimundis, mountain lions, and even a few black bears. Now those critters were natural to the area but they were around the houses and working pens so we had to thin them out.

Most people think that a javelina is from the pig family but in reality they are a peccary, basically they are from the rat family not pig. The coatimundis (pronounced coot-a-mundis), is kind of a strange looking creature. It's from the raccoon family with a long ringed tail, small ears, and a nose which comes to a point so to speak. They get into everything, and with very sharp claws they can kill your dogs.

Then of course, the rattlesnakes, which could vary from a few feet as youngsters up to approximately seven feet long. I don't remember how many of these critters we had to kill but it was many, we had no choice, I never believed in killing just to kill, but it had to be done.

Now that we were ready to start gathering cattle we found that with fences down, the neighboring ranches cattle were grazing on the outfit. We spent two or three days pushing them back onto their own property. When we met up with some of the other ranchers at the Klondike store we told them they needed to get their cattle off of the place.

A few days went by and they didn't do it, so we met them again and told them that if they didn't get them off we would start branding them ourselves. Jeff told them we would brand anything and everything on the place, even the javelinas. Needless to say, they came and got their cattle.

Once the fences were fixed it was time to start gathering cattle. We started up high on the forest leases pushing everything down to the lower pastures as we descended. We were gathering longhorns in some cases that had never been around people.

These things were wild, so you had to stay off of them similar to moving bison, and just push them in the direction you wanted them to go. These longhorns, some with double twist horns, would gut your horse and then gut you should they have the chance, they were truly wild, just like the days of the old cattle drives back in the 1800s when the cowboys had to dig them out of the brush, same thing.

Several of these unruly savages, some weighing in at 1600 pounds or more, would turn back on you and head right back up high, so we let them go and just kept moving what we could until we pushed them on down to the area of the pens, then start all over again doing the same thing the next day, sometimes wearing out two horses a day, they were like chasing deer. when you would come up to a wall of heavy brush and mesquite trees those cows would go down on their front knees and go right under all the trees and brush and they were gone.

After days like that we looked like someone had beat us with switches riding through a lot of the brush and trees where we could.

Once we had everything gathered after several weeks, the owners estimate of 150 or so had turned into almost 400 head. Next came several days of riding around and through these longhorns getting them use to us and the horses as to get them to calm down some.

Once that was done it was time to go to work. There were no squeeze chutes or calf tables on this outfit so we had to do it the old fashioned way, rope them by head and heal and stretch them out to brand, vaccinate, and then castrate the young bull calves.

For most of you who wouldn't know, back in the early days longhorns were considered game animals, even Teddy Roosevelt went on longhorn hunts. Longhorns were introduced to this country in the 1400s by the Spanish explorers, until that time cattle were not indigenous to North America.

Left behind, they turned wild and thrived with a nasty temper and a great cleverness which domesticated cattle cannot match. Even the Native American Indians found it easier to kill bison than wild longhorn cattle.

On the Cobra Ranch, the average cow ran anywhere between 1200 to 1400 pounds, the steers weighed about 1500 to 1600, and the bulls around 2000 pounds. There was one bull called King Cobra which was bred between a longhorn on the King Ranch in Texas and one from the Cobra Ranch. This bull weighed in at almost 2,400 pounds. He was a big boy and his temper could be just as big as he was.

The old steers we had gathered would lead everything else away from us making gathering a big chore. They would lead the cows to a fence that ran along side of the road then jump it with the cows following. Then we would have to ride down to the gate and push them back again.

That fence wasn't really needed because it was on the ranch property and down the road a bit was the cattle guard, so we decided to tear out that section. Funny, the next time they tried it, when they reached the point where the fence use to be, they were still jumping just like the fence was still there.

They were literally surprised when we rode up and turned them back. Once we were finally able to get rid of those steers at the sale barn in Wilcox, the cows settled down and worked much easier just like any other cow.

For some time by now, I had moved our travel trailer onto the ranch and my wife was with me. One day I spotted several buzzards flying in a circle so I told the wife that I would be back in a little while.

The other boys was in Safford getting supplies. I saddled up and rode to the spot and found one of the neighbors black face baldies dead, she was killed by a mountain lion. After I pulled out the ear tag so I could call the owner to give him the number I heard a noise in the tall brush.

Don't know how but the lion had missed the baby bull calf so I threw him up over the front of my saddle and took him back to the house, called the neighbor and he said, keep the calf.

By now my wife was tired of being out so far away from town, so I showed her how to mix up the calf manna and feed the calf from a bottle. That did make things better for her for a while, that calf became her baby. He followed her wherever she would go and even into the ranch house if she wasn't careful.

That helped her to last it out a little longer, but about a month after that she was ready to leave and I didn't blame her. I have worked several ranches in my life, but working the Cobra was an experience like none other.

It was just like stepping back one hundred years ago in many ways. Believe it or not, it was a great life.





Sunday, February 14, 2016

Livestock Predator Identification -- Wild Pigs


Here is the last part in the series covering how to identify what sort of predator attacked and/or killed their livestock. I decided to try to provide you with a fairly brief description of how to do that. I really hope the information below helps you.

First let's talk about the difference between a pig, hog and a boar.

All are descendants of a common ancestor -- the Eurasian wild boar. The term "Wild Boar" is typically used to describe Eurasian wild boar from Europe or Asia.

The term "Feral Hogs" is used in the United States. They are said to have originated from domestic breeds but may be the result of a few or many, many generations in the wild. In the United States, many simply refer to Feral Hogs as "Wild Pigs". 

The Eurasians and domestics gone feral are largely the same species and therefore will interbreed with no problems resulting in all sorts of “hybrids” between the two groups. None of these should be confused with the "javelina," which is a native pig-like mammal found in the American southwest that is not even closely related to wild boars, wild pigs, or feral hogs. 
Some reports place the total damage figure as high as $1.5 billion in the U.S. annually. That is based on a damage estimate of approximately $200 damage per wild pig hog per year and the pig population of 6 million animals.

Approximately 15 diseases can be carried by wild pigs. However, swine brucellosis and pseudorabies are two examples of diseases of concern. Recently while testing wild pigs for brucellosis, researchers at Texas Tech documented the presence of tularemia in a large number of hogs tested. Tularemia can be transmitted to other animals and humans, Pseudo can be transmitted to other animals and swine brucellosis can be contracted by humans.



Wild pigs can be highly efficient predators. They prey on poultry and livestock. And yes, wild pigs will also feed on carrion. 

Wild pig predation on livestock usually occurs on lambing or calving grounds, perhaps partially because of the prevalence of afterbirth. Occasionally, adult animals giving birth are fed upon and killed by hogs.

Young and small animals are often entirely consumed by wild pigs and the only evidence may be tracks and blood where feeding occurred. Missing young and their mothers with full udders may indicate such predation, particularly where this is frequent and no other causes for loss can be found.

Wild pigs feed on carcasses much like bears do although they are not as proficient in skinning them out. They may consume some parts that bears do not, such as the rumen and its contents. Since wild pigs commonly root up soil and vegetation, their presence is usually evident and their tracks are distinctive.


Wild Pigs -- Signs of these Predators:
  • Wild Pigs feed on calves, young sheep and goats.
  • Typically almost the entire carcass is either eaten or carried off and the only evidence may be tracks and blood where feeding occurred. 
  • Tracks of adult pigs resemble those made by a 200-pound calf. 
  • In soft ground dewclaws will show on adult hog tracks.
Perfect Kill Shots:


As with all Livestock Predators:
  • In general predators are rarely observed. Because of this, the accurate assessment of losses to specific predators often requires careful investigative work.
  • One's first move to determine what it was that attacked and/or killed your livestock, one must determine the cause of death by checking for signs on the animal and around the kill site.
  • Check for the size and location of tooth/talon marks will often indicate the species causing predation or at least eliminate certain species from suspicion. 
  • Typically, hair/feathers will obscure the attack site. Some say that ideally, the victim may need to be skinned in order to investigate the attack site properly. 
  • When investigating a kill, always consider the time of day the predator attack occurred. 
  • Extensive bleeding usually is characteristic of predators. 
  • Where external bleeding is not apparent, the hide can be removed from the carcass, particularly around the neck, throat, and head, and the area checked for tooth holes, subcutaneous hemorrhage, and tissue damage. 
  • Hemorrhage occurs only if skin and tissue damage occurs while the animal is alive. Animals that die from causes other than predation normally do not show external or subcutaneous bleeding, although bloody fluids may be lost from body openings. 
  • Livestock losses are easiest to evaluate if examinations are conducted when the carcass is still fresh. 
  • Animals may not always be killed by a throat attack, but may be pulled down from the side or rear. 
  • Blood is often on the sides, hind legs, and tail areas. 
  • Calves can have their tails chewed off and the nose may have tooth marks or be completely chewed by the predator when the tongue is eaten.
  • Tracks and droppings alone are evidence that a particular predator is in the area and when combined with other characteristics of depredation -- it can help determine what predator is causing the problem.

For more on Livestock Predator Identification, please click on any of the following links:

Livestock Predator Identification -- Bears

Livestock Predator Identification -- Mountain Lions & Bobcats

Livestock Predator Identifications -- Coyotes, Wolves, Canine, & Foxes

Complied from various sources. I hope this helps.
Tom Correa


Saturday, February 13, 2016

Livestock Predator Identifications -- Coyotes, Wolves, Canine, & Foxes


This is Predator Identification Part Three -- Coyotes, Wolves, Canine, and Foxes. As with Part One and Two, this is just a fairly brief description of how to identify what sort of predator attacked and/or killed your livestock. I really hope the information below helps you.

Coyotes, Wolves, and Canine -- Signs of these Predators:
  • Prey on big game, livestock, rodents, wild birds, and poultry. Coyotes are the most common and most serious predator of livestock in the United States. 
  • Coyotes normally kill livestock with a bite in the throat, but they infrequently pull the animal down by attacking the side, hindquarters, and udder. 
  • The rumen and intestines may be removed and dragged away from the carcass. 
  • On small lambs, the upper canine teeth may penetrate the top of the neck or the skull. 
  • Calf predation by coyotes is most common when calves are young. 
  • Calves that are attacked, but not killed, exhibit wounds in the flank, hindquarters, or front shoulders; often their tails are chewed off near the top. 
  • Deer carcasses are frequently completely dismembered and eaten. 
  • Drip irrigation system users report that coyotes chew holes in plastic pipe and disrupt irrigation.
  • Coyotes damage watermelons by biting holes through the melons and eating the centers out; raccoons, on the other hand, make small holes in the melons and scoop the pulp out with their front paws. 
  • Coyotes will also damage other fruit crops. 
  • Wolves prey on larger ungulates such as caribou, moose, elk, and cattle. 
  • Wolves usually bring down these animals by cutting or damaging the muscles and ligaments in the back legs or by seizing the victim in the flanks. 
  • Slash marks made by the canine teeth may be found on the rear legs and flanks. 
  • The downed animals usually are disemboweled. 
  • Domestic dogs can be a serious problem to livestock, especially to sheep pastured near cities and suburbs. 
  • Dogs often attack the hindquarters, flanks, and head of livestock. They rarely kill as effectively as coyotes. Normally, little flesh is consumed. 
  • Dogs are likely to wound the animal in the neck and front shoulders; the ears often are badly torn. Attacking dogs often severely mutilate the victim. 
  • Coyote and dog tracks are similar but distinguishable. 
  • Dog tracks are round with the toes spread apart. Toenail marks are usually visible on all toes. 
  • Coyote tracks are more rectangular and the toes are closer together. If any toenail marks show, they are usually of the middle toes. 
  • Coyote tracks appear in a straight line whereas those of a dog are staggered. 

Fox -- Signs of this Predator:
  • Gray and red foxes feed primarily on rabbits, hares, small rodents, poultry, birds, and insects. They also consume fruits. 
  • The gray fox eats fish, a prey seldom eaten by the red fox. 
  • Gray and especially red foxes kill young livestock, although poultry is their more common domestic prey. 
  • Foxes usually attack the throat of lambs and birds, but kill some by multiple bites to the neck and back. 
  • Normally, foxes taking fowl leave behind only a few drops of blood and feathers and carry the prey away from the kill location, often to a den. 
  • Eggs are usually opened enough to be licked out. The shells are left beside the nest and are rarely removed to the den, even though fox dens are noted for containing the remains of their prey, particularly the wings of birds. 
  • Breast and legs of birds killed by foxes are eaten first and the other appendages are scattered about. 
  • The toes of the victims are usually drawn up in a curled position because of tendons pulled when the fox strips meat from the leg bone. 
  • Smaller bones are likely to be sheared off. 
  • The remains are often partially buried. 
  • Foxes will return to established denning areas year after year. They dig dens in wooded areas or open plains. Hollow logs are also used. 
  • Dens may be identified by the small doglike tracks or by fox hairs clinging to the entrance. 
  • The gray fox is the only fox that readily climbs trees, sometimes denning in a hollow cavity. 
As with all Livestock Predators:
  • In general predators are rarely observed. Because of this, the accurate assessment of losses to specific predators often requires careful investigative work.
  • One's first move to determine what it was that attacked and/or killed your livestock, one must determine the cause of death by checking for signs on the animal and around the kill site.
  • Check for the size and location of tooth/talon marks will often indicate the species causing predation or at least eliminate certain species from suspicion. 
  • Typically, hair/feathers will obscure the attack site. Some say that ideally, the victim may need to be skinned in order to investigate the attack site properly. 
  • When investigating a kill, always consider the time of day the predator attack occurred. 
  • Extensive bleeding usually is characteristic of predators. 
  • Where external bleeding is not apparent, the hide can be removed from the carcass, particularly around the neck, throat, and head, and the area checked for tooth holes, subcutaneous hemorrhage, and tissue damage. 
  • Hemorrhage occurs only if skin and tissue damage occurs while the animal is alive. Animals that die from causes other than predation normally do not show external or subcutaneous bleeding, although bloody fluids may be lost from body openings. 
  • Livestock losses are easiest to evaluate if examinations are conducted when the carcass is still fresh. 
  • Animals may not always be killed by a throat attack, but may be pulled down from the side or rear. 
  • Blood is often on the sides, hind legs, and tail areas. 
  • Calves can have their tails chewed off and the nose may have tooth marks or be completely chewed by the predator when the tongue is eaten.
  • Tracks and droppings alone are evidence that a particular predator is in the area and when combined with other characteristics of depredation -- it can help determine what predator is causing the problem.
As for where the most common predators attack cattle:

For more on Livestock Predator Identification, please click on any of the following links:

Livestock Predator Identification -- Bears

Livestock Predator Identification -- Mountain Lions & Bobcats

Livestock Predator Identification -- Wild Pigs

Complied from various sources.
Tom Correa

Friday, February 12, 2016

Livestock Predator Identification -- Mountain Lions & Bobcats


This is Livestock Predator Identification, Part Two -- Mountain Lions and Bobcats. As with Part One on Bears, this is just a fairly brief description of how to identify what sort of predator attacked and/or killed your livestock. I really hope the information below helps you.

As with all Livestock Predators:
    Height: 2 – 3 ft. (Adult, At Shoulder)
    Lifespan: 8 – 13 years (In the wild)
    Weight: Male: 120 – 220 lbs (Adult), Female: 64 – 140 lbs (Adult)

  • Mountain Lions are solitary cats, with the exception of one to six day associations during mating periods and contact between females and their young.
  • In general predators are rarely observed. Because of this, the accurate assessment of losses to specific predators often requires careful investigative work.
  • One's first move to determine what it was that attacked and/or killed your livestock, one must determine the cause of death by checking for signs on the animal and around the kill site.
  • Check for the size and location of tooth/talon marks will often indicate the species causing predation or at least eliminate certain species from suspicion. 
  • Typically, hair/feathers will obscure the attack site. Some say that ideally, the victim may need to be skinned in order to investigate the attack site properly. 
  • When investigating a kill, always consider the time of day the predator attack occurred. 
  • Extensive bleeding usually is characteristic of predators. 
  • Where external bleeding is not apparent, the hide can be removed from the carcass, particularly around the neck, throat, and head, and the area checked for tooth holes, subcutaneous hemorrhage, and tissue damage. 
  • Hemorrhage occurs only if skin and tissue damage occurs while the animal is alive. Animals that die from causes other than predation normally do not show external or subcutaneous bleeding, although bloody fluids may be lost from body openings. 
  • Livestock losses are easiest to evaluate if examinations are conducted when the carcass is still fresh. 
  • Animals may not always be killed by a throat attack, but may be pulled down from the side or rear. 
  • Blood is often on the sides, hind legs, and tail areas. 
  • Calves can have their tails chewed off and the nose may have tooth marks or be completely chewed by the predator when the tongue is eaten.
  • Tracks and droppings alone are evidence that a particular predator is in the area and when combined with other characteristics of depredation -- it can help determine what predator is causing the problem.

Mountain Lions -- Signs of this Predator:
  • Prey on deer, elk, and domestic stock, particularly horses, sheep, goats, cattle, rodents and other small mammals, when available. 
  • Can kill large numbers of animals in one night, eg. a lone lion attacked a herd of ewes and killed 192 in one night. However, 5 to 10 sheep killed in a single night is more typical. 
  • Mountain lions, having relatively short, powerful jaws, kill with bites inflicted from above, often severing the vertebral column and breaking the neck. 
  • They also kill by biting through the skull. 
  • Lions usually feed first on the front quarters and neck region of their prey. 
  • The stomach is generally untouched. 
  • The large leg bones may be crushed and the ribs broken. 
  • Many times, after a lion has made a kill, the prey is dragged or carried into bushy areas and covered with litter. 
  • Lions might return to feed on a kill for three or four nights. 
  • They normally uncover the kill at each feeding and move it from 11 to 27 yards to recover it. 
  • After the last feeding the remains may be left uncovered, and a search of the area might reveal previous burial sites. 
  • Adult lion tracks are approximately 4 inches in length and 4 1/4 inch in width; they have four well-defined impressions of the toes at the front, roughly in a semicircle. 
  • Lions have retractable claws; therefore, no claw prints will be evident.
  • The untrained observer sometimes confuses large dog tracks with those of the lion; however, dog tracks normally show distinctive claw marks, are less round than lion tracks, and have distinctly different rear pad marks. 

Bobcats and Lynx -- Signs of these Predators:
  • Occasionally prey on sheep, goats, deer, and pronghorns; however, they more commonly kill smaller animals such as porcupines, poultry, rabbits, rodents, birds, and house cats. 
  • Bobcats characteristically kill adult deer by leaping on their back or shoulders, usually when the victim is lying down, and biting them on the trachea. 
  • The jugular vein may be punctured, but the victims usually die of suffocation and shock. 
  • Look for hemorrhages caused by claws on both sides of the carcass. 
  • Small fawns, lambs, and other small prey are often killed by a bite through the top of the neck or head. 
  • The hindquarters of deer or sheep are usually preferred by Bobcats, although the shoulder and neck region or the flank are sometimes eaten first. 
  • The rumen is often untouched. 
  • Poultry are usually killed by biting the head and neck; the heads are usually eaten. Also, both species reportedly prey on bird eggs. 
  • Bobcat and lynx droppings are similar. In areas inhabited by both species, the tracks will help determine the responsible animal. 
  • The Lynx has larger feet with much more hair and the toes tend to spread more than they do on the more compact bobcat tracks. 
  • Feline predators usually attempt to cover their kills with litter. Bobcats reach out 12 to 14 inches in scratching litter, compared to a 35-inch reach of a Mountain Lion. 
  • Canine teeth marks will also help distinguish a Mountain Lion kill from that of a Bobcat --1 1/2 inches for a lion versus 3/4 to 1 inch for a bobcat. 

For more on Livestock Predator Identification, please click on any of the following links:

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Livestock Predator Identification -- Bears


After having a number of my readers write to ask about how to identify what sort of predator attacked and/or killed their livestock. I decided to try to provide you with a fairly brief description of how to do that. I really hope the information below helps you.

As for Livestock Predators:
  • In general, predators are rarely observed. Because of this, the accurate assessment of losses to specific predators often requires careful investigative work.
  • First one must determine the cause of death by checking for signs on the animal and around the kill site.
  • Check for the size and location of tooth/talon marks will often indicate the species causing predation or at least eliminate certain species from suspicion. 
  • Typically, hair/feathers will obscure the attack site. Some say that ideally, the victim may need to be skinned in order to investigate the attack site properly. 
  • When investigating a kill, always consider the time of day the predator attack occurred. 
  • Extensive bleeding usually is characteristic of predators. 
  • Where external bleeding is not apparent, the hide can be removed from the carcass, particularly around the neck, throat, and head, and the area checked for tooth holes, subcutaneous hemorrhage, and tissue damage. 
  • Hemorrhage occurs only if skin and tissue damage occurs while the animal is alive. Animals that die from causes other than predation normally do not show external or subcutaneous bleeding, although bloody fluids may be lost from body openings. 
  • Livestock losses are easiest to evaluate if examinations are conducted when the carcass is still fresh. 
  • Animals may not always be killed by a throat attack, but may be pulled down from the side or rear. 
  • Blood is often on the sides, hind legs, and tail areas. 
  • Calves can have their tails chewed off and the nose may have tooth marks or be completely chewed by the predator when the tongue is eaten.
  • Tracks and droppings alone are evidence that a particular predator is in the area and when combined with other characteristics of depredation -- it can help determine what predator is causing the problem.
Bears -- Signs of these Predators:
  • Prey on livestock. Black bears usually kill by biting the neck or by slapping the victim. Torn, mauled, and mutilated carcasses are characteristic of bear attacks. 
  • Often, the bear will eat the udders of female prey, possibly to obtain milk. 
  • The victim usually is opened ventrally and the heart and liver are consumed. 
  • The intestines are often spread out around the kill site, and the animal may be partially skinned while the carcass is fed upon. 
  • Smaller livestock such as sheep and goats may be consumed almost entirely, and only the rumen, skin, and large bones left. 
  • Feces are generally found within the kill area, and a bedding site is often found nearby. Bears use their feet while feeding so they do not slide the prey around as do coyotes. 
  • If the kill is made in the open, it may be moved to a more secluded spot. 
  • The grizzly has a feeding and killing pattern similar to that of the black bear. 
  • It has been found that most cattle are killed by a bite through the back of the neck. 
  • Large prey often have claw marks on the flanks or hams. 
  • The prey’s back is sometimes broken in front of the hips where the bear simply crushed it down. 
  • Young calves are occasionally bitten through the forehead. 
  • The presence of bears has stampeded range sheep, resulting in death from suffocation or from falls over cliffs. 
  • A marauding bear searching for food may also play havoc with garbage cans, cabins, camp sites, and apiaries. 
  • The bear track resembles that of a human, but has distinctive claw marks. The little inside toes often leave no marks in dust or shallow mud so the print appears to be four-toed. 

For more on Livestock Predator Identification, please click on any of the following links:


Tom Correa