Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1

    Interesting email

    For the past few days, Ihave been emailing back and forth with Carla Everett. She works for tach but Idon't know what she really does or what her position is. Ido know that she contacted me 1st when the new regs went into effect. Anyway, We have been emailing back and forth arguing over the effectiveness of the regs. Today, she wrote that if Ihad a better idea, to send it in and get a petition started. Basically, Itold her my idea was for the cuffs to be taken off of game ranches so that they could buy all hogs. Iwent on to say that Ihad no faith in our govt. so Idon't know that a petition would do any good. Imean, they made their minds up long ago. What Itold Carla, was that with buying stations shutting down, the plan to put a dent in the hog population is failing. What are y'alls thoughts on the idea of letting ranches buy all the hogs they can?

  2. #2
    I think that ranches should be able to buy all the hogs they want.

  3. #3
    CODY wrote... I think that ranches should be able to buy all the hogs they want. Ihope that everyone thinks like that. Maybe we could get tach to loosen up an the regs. Carla and Ihave become quite the pen pals but Isee she is 100% govt. Maybe we could start a petition and send it her way.

  4. #4
    I think the same as ya;ll the buying of hogs is the only way some of Us can hunting to pay for fuel feed and the time you go and come home emty handed what we do for fun at some point cost us alot for them who do it alot and is away to curb the number of hogs in areas that they dont wont them. you dont see the Parks takeing all the wild game and giveing the health checks but yet they also let hunter;s in the trim the herds so i say if they do this then they be willing to do the same ,or just leave things alone. this pic;s for James

  5. #5
    herefishy
    Guest
    I wasn't aware of any regultion relating to the limit on the number of swine that could be purchased (during any time period?). I thought that the issue was the cost of the testing for relocation of boars, which resulted in lower demand and as such the lower price at the quarantine location. Relating back to another thread (that everyone hates me for), the advice that I offered to the game ranch operator, was to raise pricing accordingly in order to cover the tangible 20% increase in the cost of the prize boar. As such, perhaps the quarantine operator should do so accordingly. Eventually, there will be only (a minimal) number ofcertified wild swine quarantine faciltiy that will take it out of the arse of the game ranch operator, anyway - not to mention the cost of transportation to and from limited facilities. The costs of the quarantine operator has increased with record-keeping, his sales price should follow accordingly. If there is lower demand because of the increased price, the logical business decision would be to decrease inventory. I think that if the industry held it's ground.... trapper... quarantine operator.... game ranch operator, the consumer demand for the product (Texas Hog Huntin') will satisfy the costs and expenditures of the industry and realize a nice profit. I don't think that the out-of-state business would decrease - there's too much of a reputation. The increase in the cost of managing the wild feral swine herd will only result in a sustained and healthy feral herd, without the threat of damaging the commercial livestock herds (and cooperation amongst the commercial and game operations will only serve to compliment each industry). Mind you, that in a recent post I offered a link to an (scientific/objective) test/survey of disease in feral swine in several Texas Counties... Performed recently in year 2008... http://www.aasv.org/shap/issues/v16n6/v16n6p312.htm and if you really looked at it.. the map/graphic anyway.. Particularly the Results Chart..... you will see that several South Texas Counties resulted in 41% to 100% positive results for PRV (Psuedo-rabies Virus). I don't think that even any game ranch operator would be inclined to indescriminately import boars that will transmit PRV to the native feral swine in his area, within the considerations of the longevity of his business, as the PRV results in swine abortions/death of piglets. Thus diminishing the local herd and affectinga game operators operation. But as I think about it... if an operator is purchasing relocated boars, he obviously cannot have a local feral herd (sounders) across his property... would that be correct? Are the relocated boars only the ones who test negative? yet are still subject to containmenton the property? Peace, and Kind Regards, Mark

  6. #6
    nate wrote... CODY wrote... I think that ranches should be able to buy all the hogs they want. Ihope that everyone thinks like that. Maybe we could get tach to loosen up an the regs. Carla and Ihave become quite the pen pals but Isee she is 100% govt. Maybe we could start a petition and send it her way. Nate,I'd sign thatpetition right on the topbro.

  7. #7
    Mark you still don't get it and Idon't know how to explain it where you can. If you will read the regs, you will find out that ranches cannot purchase sows. This hurts everyone in one way or another. Buying stations don't have to pay much for them so trappers open their gates. The population is therefore not thinned out so the breeding continues. At least, with the game ranches, a big enough supply could be maintained so that the price stays low enough to encourage more killing. Idon't want to see a rancher have to raise his/her prices to keep the operation open. If that happens, the plan will again backfire and hunters won't be so apt to pay the high costs to hunt a hog. What Isee from you is, you are a hater of a long list of things to include: the huge hog problem, game ranches, plans to get the population under control, and others who don't share your ideas. Are you a tach employee? Also, you keep refering to relocated boars. Why would someone from south Texas need to buy a boar from east Texas when there are soo many boars localy? Mark...you just don't make any since with your thinking. If local hogs are infected, and they stay on local ranches, where is the spread of disease?

  8. #8
    herefishy
    Guest
    I understand that the the regulations do not permit the relocation of sows and gilts. What is the TAHC reasoning for that? Mark

  9. #9
    herefishy wrote... I understand that the the regulations do not permit the relocation of sows and gilts. What is the TAHC reasoning for that? Mark Idon't know what the reasoning behind that is. Maybe tach is in bed with local buying stations. Idon't think it is helping the numbers anyway.

  10. #10
    herefishy
    Guest
    Well, it seems that the limitation on the "boar only" transportation thingy is the mis communication between us. Perhaps if the discussion relating to the limitation of "boar only" could be addressed, I could more thoroughly understand the concern. It is simple to understand that an (operator) would want an optimum number of swine to offer to a client. However, why is the relocation of swine limited to boars onlywho pass disease testing? Inquiring minds want to know. Peace, Mark

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. History Of Boar Mythology...Very Interesting...
    By SirVival in forum Campfire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-05-2010, 05:27 PM
  2. Featured Video Information...interesting!!!
    By Hogdude1234 in forum Tips & Tricks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-03-2009, 11:00 AM
  3. Email Link Fixed
    By neilldavidson in forum Updates
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2009, 03:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •