Texas legalizes shooting invasive sheep from a helicopter for sport

[RdRdrFan]

Again, if it wasn’t legal to charge money for hunts, then these “I love my private property rights” landowners would be begging for state assistance in killing them.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

That’s a whole mouthful of socialism right there.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I apologize for only taking the moment to read your first, but I'm not sure why a "See RdRdrFan response for my position" wasn't all that was necessary. I promise to do better in the future and save your comment for last.

I'll read his later and consider his points.



This explanation is exactly my point. No matter where you go, the common denominator of extreme animal populations is private property and how they prioritize management.

And extermination isn't the same as heavily reduced to a manageable population, I may have used them somewhat interchangeably but to your point, NM allows a few exotics to thrive within a certain core range where they fill an ecological niche and have relatively low competitive impact with native species. Then outside of that do a very effective job of keeping that population essentially crushed, with the odd band of animals turning up here and there.

And I'll admit fault for just generalizing landowners but I'm generally expecting some good will on the part of those I'm having a conversation with to know I'm not talking about the small guys stuck in between major population hubs (caused by landowners who see a value in keeping them around) and who truly want/need them gone (I'd wager not likely not the guys who own helicopters to offer hunts from, but I digress)

But allow me to propose a hypothetical. Say I pay a Texas outfitter $10k to shoot a giant Aoudad. So he drives me around, we find a canyon to check, and there he is...Aoudad of my dreams standing on the opposite wall surrounded by his giant harem of equals, younger males, and ewes.

If I were to get set up, then turn to him and say, "Hey, I hear these guys have a major negative impact on the environment and are super overpopulated. I know my hunt agreement said one mature male sheep, and popping one of those ewes should cost me $4k, but how set in stone is that really? What do you say I put a bullet into him, then you and I unload on as many as we can before they make it over the ridge? Won't cost you a dime, and we eradicate some pests."

He can do whatever he wants, it's his/his boss's land, but what would you honestly expect the response to be?

If it's anything other than "sure," and I knew they had petitioned for this rule in the name of necessary population control, I'm not going to get mad, complain, or lecture how unfair that is, but I absolutely have all of the ground to stand on to rib them about it a bit.

The place I was hunting at a few months ago said we could shoot ewes for 400 bucks each. I’d imagine there would be trouble if you just started shooting every animal you saw.

 

[JGRaider]

Again, if it wasn’t legal to charge money for hunts, then these “I love my private property rights” landowners would be begging for state assistance in killing them.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

Right, and IF the queen had nuts she'd be the king.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Again, if it wasn’t legal to charge money for hunts, then these “I love my private property rights” landowners would be begging for state assistance in killing them.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

I know it’s hard to understand for non-Texans but you aren’t going to limit property rights to appease one land owner or you, while screwing 100’s. General public doesn’t care either way because You/they most likely will never hunt any of those ranches, you are talking an area that’s solid private land and larger then Montana, Wyoming combined

Essentially it won’t ever be that way in Texas, it’s also same reason some of us have a 5 month deer season and 100+- ranch whitetail tags.

Our state is controlled by large land owners. Those ranches’ top income are minerals(oil and natural gas), hunting, then Ag. It is complete opposite mentality then western states. General public has a big say in western states due large amounts of public lands, just not the mentality here.

This thread exist because I believe the rule to approve ability to charge was an FFA requirement,
I could be wrong

essentially TPWD looks at it as kill all you want , how ever you want on your land. If you want to pay to shoot them like hogs from a helicopter, knock your self out, that’s more dead aoudads.

 

[cbeard64]

Lifelong Texan here.

This is a private land state. You guys that are used to being able to roam anywhere want and throw out big opinions about what should happen on the landscape will find things a little different down here.

You’re not going to do a damn thing about the aoudad populations without the buy-in and cooperation of the large ranches. That’s getting harder to do when they can charge $6K a pop to hunt them.

Which is why I cringe at this “aoudad as poor-man’s sheep” trend that’s growing every year.

As I said above, ultimately it’s the demand to hunt them that will keep them on the landscape. So if hunters are looking for a scapegoat on this issue, the mirror may be the best place to look.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Plenty of other states have strong private land traditions. It’s not that I am advocating for anyone to be able to trespass on private property to kill these animals.

But Texas landowners (and hog outfitters in many Southeastern states) have rigged the game both ways. They get the animals marked as invasive so they can charge people to hunt them year round or from helicopters or whatever means that someone will pay for… means that are normally associated with unsportsmanlike methods that are necessary for eradication, but they don’t actually want the population eradicated or even significantly reduced.

In my simple little mind, you either get to treat them as a game species or as an invasive exotic that must be destroyed at all costs, not both.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[JGRaider]

Plenty of other states have strong private land traditions. It’s not that I am advocating for anyone to be able to trespass on private property to kill these animals.

But Texas landowners (and hog outfitters in many Southeastern states) have rigged the game both ways. They get the animals marked as invasive so they can charge people to hunt them year round or from helicopters or whatever means that someone will pay for… means that are normally associated with unsportsmanlike methods that are necessary for eradication, but they don’t actually want the population eradicated or even significantly reduced.

In my simple little mind, you either get to treat them as a game species or as an invasive exotic that must be destroyed at all costs, not both.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

You need to quit while you're behind.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

You need to quit while you're behind.

The snarky one liners don’t actually address the hypocrisy in your position that it is somehow okay to charge people thousands of dollars to kill an invasive species.

And the absolutist, “I can do whatever I want with the animals on my property” is belied by the state regulation of the actual native species.

But hey, who am I to argue with someone’s right to feel righteous for getting paid to pretend to eradicate an invasive species?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Oakman]

Will the new Texas law apply to duo paragliding, thats gonna be more affordable?

 

[JGRaider]

The snarky one liners don’t actually address the hypocrisy in your position that it is somehow okay to charge people thousands of dollars to kill an invasive species.

Texas landowners can charge whatever they want, however they want, and any time they want to kill invasive, and "non native/exotic" game animals as classified by the TP&W. That's a fact even if you or anyone else doesn't like it. You can play by the landowner's rules or stay home, the choice is yours. BTW, TX landowner's charge hunters to kill predators including mountain lions that kill their sheep, goats, and cattle too anytime they want. You have a problem with that?

And the absolutist, “I can do whatever I want with the animals on my property” is belied by the state regulation of the actual native species.

See above for "non-native" game. Obviously TX landowners must abide by State regs if the game is classified and seasons/bag limits/etc are dictated by TP&W.

But hey, who am I to argue with someone’s right to feel righteous for getting paid to pretend to eradicate an invasive species.
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

You're entitled to your opinion no matter how misguided and off base it is.

 

[cbeard64]

The snarky one liners don’t actually address the hypocrisy in your position that it is somehow okay to charge people thousands of dollars to kill an invasive species.

And the absolutist, “I can do whatever I want with the animals on my property” is belied by the state regulation of the actual native species.

But hey, who am I to argue with someone’s right to feel righteous for getting paid to pretend to eradicate an invasive species?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

Do you have an actual, practical answer? Because just calling landowners hypocrites ain’t it. The animals have value because hunters are willing to pay to shoot them.

Just like ring-necked pheasants and brown trout have value even though they are invasive too.

If TPWD makes them “game animals” that will only limit the take and increase the demand.

I can’t understand your mindset. This ain’t public land down here. Absent some dire public health and safety issue, nobody can come onto private land start shooting, trapping, and poisoning animals without permission. Period. End of story.

 

[S-3 ranch]

This is a dumb topic, as it was never against any law to use a helicopter
To roundup livestock or kill exotic species, in Texas
The state owns All the native animals here and regulates how , when , where, number of animals per county
Elk once where native, but now are deemed extinct and exotic transplants
Aoudad are so dang expensive because, we land owners, are required to have
A state permit & insurance to lease the land, we never get a single permit for big horn sheep , so state government removed the incentive to keep aoudad numbers in check,
And having some out of state nimrods , creeping around, leaving gates open
Hurting themselves, driving off the road, ect, ect
Then taking you to court, only leaving a outfitter to be the responsible party
Works

 

[String Bean]

Hunted South of Marfa in 2021 and 2022. We all got decent rams and saw aoudad every day.

Fast forward to 2024 a buddy went to same ranch same guide. 3 days of hunting and saw 1 aoudad on neighbors property. He kept asking the guide what was up. Guide finally admitted that about 2 months before the neighboring property had a hello hunt. They claimed 6500 aoudad killed. The guide had only had 1 successful hunt (ram killed) since the helo hunt.

All info third hand. But hello hunts can have farther reaching impact than some think. I know it has affected our hog hunts both positive and negative depending on the trip

 

[S-3 ranch]

Hunted South of Marfa in 2021 and 2022. We all got decent rams and saw aoudad every day.

Fast forward to 2024 a buddy went to same ranch same guide. 3 days of hunting and saw 1 aoudad on neighbors property. He kept asking the guide what was up. Guide finally admitted that about 2 months before the neighboring property had a hello hunt. They claimed 6500 aoudad killed. The guide had only had 1 successful hunt (ram killed) since the helo hunt.

All info third hand. But hello hunts can have farther reaching impact than some think. I know it has affected our hog hunts both positive and negative depending on the trip

If that’s true that is a good start ! But probably closer to 650 if they hit the mule mountain area, south of marfa , near the WMA which is completely overrun with them , the muledeer are basically gone from that area!
Pronghorn migrated out years ago.
Hopefully they put the major pinch on them near the last three bighorn WMA’s
And continue to do it to the next mountain range
That pneumonia they carry is bad stuff when water is limited and everything is sharing the same water source

 

[Kenny Hart]

His response is going to be no. It’s a job for them, no different then asking for a second free meal at a restaurant

One you are now basically herd shooting after first shot, second he is on the clock as an employee, he gets paid by the hunt, not by the animal and with out landowner permission in Texas you could face step civil charges, as you have to have expressed permission from LO or LO agent( that has expressed permission) for every exotic you shot.

Now he may let you cull ewes if he really likes you and they feel the need to, but probably at a fee that’s mutually beneficial and adequate enough to make it worth their while.

When you hunt in Texas you most likely signed a contract, you and outfitter are in a contract again as it’s their livelihood now

Much of that I'll agree with, and completely understand. But again, you're talking about the landowner's decision to restrict cull hunts for pest exotics that have no protections on a property that htey have complete say over what can be shot, while then complaining about all these same animals overrunning their landscape.

I'll disagree with the free lunch comparison, as making a meal requires time and resources that a restaurant must pay for.

When I shot my Aoudad, the other ram he was with ran a few yards, then stood looking in confusion for over a minute before trotting off into the desert, giving plenty time for a second shot if someone else was with me that had a tag. My premise above was asking permission to shoot any remaining animal(s) after the target animal fell.

This requires no extra time, effort, or cost on the part of the outfitter, especially when compared to the now-alternative which is herd-shooting sheep from an aerial vehicle with no regard to maiming, humane death, recovery, or wanton waste.

 

[Kenny Hart]

The population is out of control in certain areas because the ecosystem that is prime for DBH is also the ecosystem that is prime for aoudad. What you experienced in NM is the aoudad’s ability to exist in a very sub-prime environment. They don’t thrive there but it has NOTHING to do with anything humans are doing.

@RdRdrFan and @JGRaider Been on a bit of a hiatus with vacation and work catch-up, but a lot to unpack here.

First, sorry guys but I’m not buying the idea that Aoudad “thrive” in TX but are somehow just barely getting by in NM. That makes absolutely no sense from a biological perspective, and I completely reject the statement that the lower populations are completely independent from human influence.

They evolved to live in some of the most inhospitable habitat in the world, that which the regions of NM where they are allowed to live are not. Their food is plentiful and everywhere, they don’t need a water source, but the land is chicken pocked with water tanks for cattle in case they really feel like getting a drink.

They have an identical fecundity rate yet are a much sparser animal on the landscape in NM than Mule deer, despite deer being far more specialized, requiring actual water sources to live, and FAR more susceptible to predation. Deer are more plentiful because there isn’t a months-long any-weapon season on does like there is sheep, full stop. I’m not sure why that’s such a controversial statement when it is so obviously and demonstrably true.

They, like Ibex and Oryx, are OTC in any unit outside of their intended range, because NMDGF doesn’t want to lose control of the populations and have them migrate into and compete with other native animals in their home ranges. Those exotics also must contend with many any weapon, either-sex hunts. Don’t believe me, speak with any of their hunt unit biologists. Ask if they hunt them as well (every one of them does) just to be sure they aren’t giving you some hippie bias if you like.

Aoudad cannot possibly become “out of control” any more than deer, as they do not reproduce any faster. If you only allowed very limited take of the most mature rams in New Mexico with no effort to manage the herd for a decade, you’d have an identical situation with sheep in NM as you do in TX.

nobody is “breeding” aoudad. Not in the areas that are up for discussion (where they are affecting the DBH). To say that anyone of those ranchers are “actively stocking” their ranch with aoudad is complete ignorance. Not one of them stocks aoudad.

I realize that I’m conflating/condensing a few different large mammals into one “invasives’ group, but again, FWC and to a broader sense USF&W do a great job removing hogs from ecologically sensitive areas here in FL. We have a lot of critical habitats within many wildlife refuges for many ground-nesting animals, and if they want pigs gone or heavily reduced, they do it. And not by chasing groups of pigs around with rifles, as that does nothing.

And yes, it is a near-universal practice here in FL, and therefore I will make the same assumption that at least a portion of farms do as such in TX, where hunting outfits stock their farms with pigs (generally with live trapped individuals) for hunting...while simultaneously advertising that pigs are destructive to native wildlife, and you’re doing your part by helping to “manage their population” by shooting one or two from underneath a feeder. Again, this is just a satire of “conservation” and the landowners who participate should be able to take the licks.

This entire discussion has exposed the ignorance several of you have of the entire situation as well as your entitlement (and possible jealousy?). The original complaint was that land owners in Texas are charging what you deem to be too much for access to hunt an invasive species and that they have no right to complain about that species or the damage that they cause.

I'm not saying that landowners should not have any and all resource available to eliminate non-native pest animals, I'm simply pointing out and ridiculing the idea of creating an environment in which they can thrive in order to offer trophy animals at premium prices, then claiming they are in dire need of control.

Hunters and landowners 100% creating an existential situation that that then needs to be "solved" is what I was ridiculing from the start, and is what I'm still doing so now. I have not altered course or pivoted. My position hasn't changed. It's a completely transparent situation to any and all who are not directly involved or have some level of emotional stake. What's they saying, "can't see the forest for the trees," or something...

Sorry, I'm not jealous that I do not have the funds to pay exorbitant prices to hunt animals with high-success rates for the simple price of a tag. I rather like and want to see thriving environments and native animals...even the predators that the seemingly majority of voices in our space want to eliminate from the landscape all because one might eat some deer for sustenance that they just really want to hunt. That's one of the real chronic jealousies of our pastime, but lets not open that can of worms in this thread

 

[Kenny Hart]

That’s a whole mouthful of socialism right there.

100% agreed, it is socialism when private citizens ask for handouts off the backs of taxpayers to solve problems they created for themselves.

 

[RdRdrFan]

100% agreed, it is socialism when private citizens ask for handouts off the backs of taxpayers to solve problems they created for themselves.

The ranchers in question are not asking for handouts from the government. Your posts continue to expose your ignorance on this issue.

I’m in Edmonton about to head to the airport headed for Whitehorse and on into the Yukon backcountry. So I’m not going to waste my time educating you as it relates to your prior post. I’ll let one of the other guys who also actually knows and lives in the part of the world in question answer you. But I’ll say that I live in Texas probably 50 miles from the New Mexico border. I’ve spent my entire life in West Texas, the Panhandle and New Mexico. Your assumptions about the environments and differences there couldn’t be more wrong. Neither could your assumption that government intervention is the reason why aoudad are sparse in New Mexico.

But I digress……I’m headed hunting so enough with attempting to educate those who have no desire to deal with the facts that expose the fallacies of their opinions.

 

[cuerro viejo]

100% agreed, it is socialism when private citizens ask for handouts off the backs of taxpayers to solve problems they created for themselves.

You missing alot of the point. They thrive in Texas due to land ownership segmentation. Every fence line is different. One land owner may hate them and shoot everyone he sees, the next may hate hunting and allows zero hunting for anything, and the next landowner sees $8k per ram he sees. With that said No rancher in Texas is looking for handouts by the U.S. tax payer due to Exotics. Only thing close would be a drought rangeland insurance program, but that’s an insurance program based on rain fall not exotics. In fact the whole post is about Texas changing the laws to allow FAA to allow monetary exchange for helicopter commercial hunting (just like they did with hogs).. exact opposite of socialism

comparing aoudad populations based off eco systems of NM and TX, is mental gymnastics. It’s trifling at best. The real differences in populations again goes back to land owner ship blocks. Texas has a private land block damn near larger than entire state of NM. Infact the entire NM aoudad range is a 1/5 of Texas Aoudad range at best.

 

[cuerro viejo]

You’re example of NM oryx and Aoudad and Ibex is exactly what Texas does, except Texas offers the LO ability to eliminate them from private land with out State over site. NM just offers unlimited LO tags…. While still padding their coffers.