Unless they are specifically providing feed, housing, protection etc for the hogs they are not "maintaining a huntable population" in order to commit any sort of fraud. If you believe they are sit down with your DA.Definition: Fraud: Somebody who deliberately deceives another primarily for financial gain.
If you'll read my comment again you'll read that I posed that statement as my opinion.
Once again, in my opinion; One who charges to hunt, and maintains a huntable population for profit, and makes an insurance claim for damages caused by wild hogs is fraud.
These landowners may be operating within the parameters of their insurance policy; however if a concerted effort is not made to eliminate the damages claimed but to sustain a huntable population for profit, in my opinion that is deception.
The poison turns the fat in the hog bright blue. You would have to be blind to miss it.Try paying for a ranch and keeping it operating before daring to judge.
I do have a problem with the state doing anything to subsidize poisoning of the hogs. How the heck is someone to know the hog they trap or shoot to eat has been exposed?
Try paying for a few hundred or thousand acres and then get back with us.Wild Rose: In fact I do own a piece of property and have the hogs controlled pretty well I think with more than 200 animals removed in the last 14 months from my little slice of the pie and contiguous properties.
No matter whether you own several hundred acres or many thousand acres keeping a property up is a lot of work and it has been an effort to get a handle on it, but as for now is quite manageable.
Apparently my fraud comment has PO'd some but that is MY OWN OPINION!!! You know the old saying, everyone's got one. And no I don't charge to hunt nor do I file any Insurance claims for damages caused by wild hogs.
With no long term data on potential health issues involved in the consumption of meat from animals who have consumed it it's crazy.I doubt a small dose will turn any thing blue. I think this is just one more big one like the peaceful death. We eat enough with chemicals in it. Why in the world would we take a chance on this.
With no long term data on potential health issues involved in the consumption of meat from animals who have consumed it it's crazy.
Not so long ago we were all sure that eating a little lead shot or bullet fragments wasn't going to hurt us either.
OK. How big a dose does it take to turn the fat blue and how many days does it take to happen? Plus why at first did they say a peaceful death. Now five days of terrible suffering. They also said the meat was still good to eat. Are you and the biologists serving it to your family and friends. Ya'll should have plenty. I am not about to eat it. We were told nicotine, lead, and many other chemicals were safe. One of the great advantages of hunting is that we are able to bring to our dinner table meat that has no steroids, growth hormones, preservatives, or other chemicals.
Never seen any data or heard any conversation about five day suffering/peaceful death.