|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 17:09:51 GMT
I think you use the word "subjugate" far too oftenly, simply engaging is not subjugating. What i think happened is the Bull Arab distracted the Buffalo a bit, ran around it's legs, latched to it's lower body, ect so the Hunter could get a good shot. Not shot. Stabbed. Subjugated means safe for a human to approach and handle the quarry. If the dog hasn't subjugated the quarry it is still free to attack and kill any human who comes too close. So a boar or buffalo "bayed" by a catahoula or plotthound or whatever is not subjugated, a human can't just walk up to the animal, they will be killed. Such dogs are used with a rifle. Bull arabs are used with a knife. Bull arabs simply don't behave in the way you describe, they go straight for the head and hang. For better or worse. Was the knife in question a medieval longsword? Have a hard time believing you are killing a Buffalo with a regular knife. If you search "Buffalo hunting" they are all carrying high-caliber rifles. Knifes are used, at most, for Deer and Boar, not Buffalo. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 17:09:52 GMT
Some aussie pigs which are supposedly lesser (just a quick glimpse at my pics)-        Now if you wanted to say ussuri boars and manchurian boars and carpathian boars and central/eastern european are bigger, yes, that is true. Aussie pigs are in the category of boars that max out around 150 kgs and usually mature males are closer to 100 kgs. That is similar to many wild boar populations. Smaller than a few, bigger than many, similar to most. That is just on size. They are also reportedly nastier than most. Some are much larger, many are much smaller- Malaysian, Indonesian, Sumatran, Taiwanese, Northern Mongolian, Japanese, Mediterranean, Italian, Anatolian, Pakistan, North african ... all smaller than Australian pigs on Average. Central/eastern european, Ussuri, Manchurian, Carpathian, Central asian are bigger, but not necessarily nastier. Australian boars have a similar size to Indian boars, Indian boars are considered one of the absolute nastiest boars, among international hunters aussie pigs have a similar reputation. Overall, aussie pigs are mediocre in size, but bigger than the smaller populations. In reputation for nastiness they are quite high. Maybe too high. I can tell you that Aussie pigs in general may be slightly overrated due to the fact that Top end boars and mountain boars are very nasty but crop country boars can frankly be pretty mediocre and easy. Most tourist hunters will deal with top end boars, that is boars that live in the far north with sw crocs and buffaloes and etc and they are extremely nasty like Indian boars-  Frankly where I am from, they aren't that dangerous. It varies around the continent, just as it varies around eurasia. Many "pure wild boars" in europe and asia aren't shit, totally easy money. But some are nasty as hell. I think the best of the best, the most formidable, are Ussuri Boars, Carpathian boars, Indian Boars, Top end Australian Boars, Eastern European boars. That is the general consensus and testimony of international hunters. The idea that feral boars are easy and genuine wild boars are deadly is false, it is well known that feral populations quickly mutate back into wild boars for all intents and purposes, and also some genuine wild boars are nothing. I'd argue boars in California and the southeastern us are just as formidable because a lot of their ancestors are Russian stock Feral hogs in North and South America can be very formidable, and some populations aren't formidable. I don't know much about california specifically. I don't think "Russian stock" makes much difference. Well... I think it can be relevant with max sizes maybe. It seems in the pampas in Argentina some boars get very huge and it may be due to ussuri infusion. But as far as formidability goes... I think that comes to down to persecution from predators/hunters, and I think genetic origin is very much beside the point in such cases. Some populations "run hot" from intense cutthroat conditions where they are regularly fighting off elite hunting dogs and predators. Australia has some populations which are way way up there in relation to the list of global populations. I have seen enough from Argentinian boars to say they can be very nasty and also big (probably bigger than Australian populations on average). Brazil is interesting because it has specifically been noted by scientists that boars in the pantanal are mid and mediocre, but those in the atlantic forest are beastly and formidable- linkAustralia is the same where we have some areas where the pigs are honestly very mid and frankly pushovers, but other areas where they are gnarly as hell. I'd say it is the same all over the world. California may be in the latter category, I don't know. All I know it is not a "wild boar vs feral pig" thing. Some feral pig populations are as nasty as they come. |
|
ophio
Ruminant
Posts: 230
|
Post by ophio on Oct 1, 2023 17:14:14 GMT
I'd argue boars in California and the southeastern us are just as formidable because a lot of their ancestors are Russian stock Feral hogs in North and South America can be very formidable, and some populations aren't formidable. I don't know much about california specifically. I don't think "Russian stock" makes much difference. Well... I think it can be relevant with max sizes maybe. It seems in the pampas in Argentina some boars get very huge and it may be due to ussuri infusion. But as far as formidability goes... I think that comes to down to persecution from predators/hunters, and I think genetic origin is very much beside the point in such cases. Some populations "run hot" from intense cutthroat conditions where they are regularly fighting off elite hunting dogs and predators. Australia has some populations which are way way up there in relation to the list of global populations. I have seen enough from Argentinian boars to say they can be very nasty and also big (probably bigger than Australian populations on average). Brazil is interesting because it has specifically been noted by scientists that boars in the pantanal are mid and mediocre, but those in the atlantic forest are beastly and formidable- linkAustralia is the same where we have some areas where the pigs are honestly very mid and frankly pushovers, but other areas where they are gnarly as hell. I'd say it is the same all over the world. California may be in the latter category, I don't know. All I know it is not a "wild boar vs feral pig" thing. Some feral pig populations are as nasty as they come. Might be more of a size thing then. The boars in California, Texas, and the other southeastern states can get as large as ussuri boars if not larger. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 17:15:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 17:15:19 GMT
Not shot. Stabbed. Subjugated means safe for a human to approach and handle the quarry. If the dog hasn't subjugated the quarry it is still free to attack and kill any human who comes too close. So a boar or buffalo "bayed" by a catahoula or plotthound or whatever is not subjugated, a human can't just walk up to the animal, they will be killed. Such dogs are used with a rifle. Bull arabs are used with a knife. Bull arabs simply don't behave in the way you describe, they go straight for the head and hang. For better or worse. Was the knife in question a medieval longsword? Have a hard time believing you are killing a Buffalo with a regular knife. Pig sticker knives usually have a blade that is 14-17 inches long. Long enough, evidently. And logically, I mean their heart and lungs will not be that deep beneath their rib cage. Your downplay attempts are always insanely transparent and desperate reaches which weaken your overall argument and make you look like a fool. If you assert yourself as someone obviously TRYING so hard to make dogs look bad it just crushes your credibility. You should fake being complimentary and concede points occasionally to bolster your trustworthiness and credibility in a general sense. Just a tip. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 17:24:00 GMT
Was the knife in question a medieval longsword? Have a hard time believing you are killing a Buffalo with a regular knife. Pig sticker knives usually have a blade that is 14-17 inches long. Long enough, evidently. And logically, I mean their heart and lungs will not be that deep beneath their rib cage. Your downplay attempts are always insanely transparent and desperate reaches which weaken your overall argument and make you look like a fool. If you assert yourself as someone obviously TRYING so hard to make dogs look bad it just crushes your credibility. You should fake being complimentary and concede points occasionally to bolster your trustworthiness and credibility in a general sense. Just a tip. Didn't know hunting knifes were that large, but did the guy really get under the Buffalo to stab it's lungs? . |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 17:27:29 GMT
Feral hogs in North and South America can be very formidable, and some populations aren't formidable. I don't know much about california specifically. I don't think "Russian stock" makes much difference. Well... I think it can be relevant with max sizes maybe. It seems in the pampas in Argentina some boars get very huge and it may be due to ussuri infusion. But as far as formidability goes... I think that comes to down to persecution from predators/hunters, and I think genetic origin is very much beside the point in such cases. Some populations "run hot" from intense cutthroat conditions where they are regularly fighting off elite hunting dogs and predators. Australia has some populations which are way way up there in relation to the list of global populations. I have seen enough from Argentinian boars to say they can be very nasty and also big (probably bigger than Australian populations on average). Brazil is interesting because it has specifically been noted by scientists that boars in the pantanal are mid and mediocre, but those in the atlantic forest are beastly and formidable- linkAustralia is the same where we have some areas where the pigs are honestly very mid and frankly pushovers, but other areas where they are gnarly as hell. I'd say it is the same all over the world. California may be in the latter category, I don't know. All I know it is not a "wild boar vs feral pig" thing. Some feral pig populations are as nasty as they come. Might be more of a size thing then. The boars in California, Texas, and the other southeastern states can get as large as ussuri boars if not larger. Ussuri boar infusion can make feral pigs huge, but so can recent tame bacon pig infusion. "Hogzilla" weighed over 1000 lbs but obviously was recently infused with tame pig or even a stray pig itself-  Domestic pigs bred for meat production reach 800-1000 lbs habitually. So that can confuse matters size wise. It seems 80-150 kgs is the normal range for most populations, then you have shrunken populations like meditteranian boars and indonesian boars where adult males are often 50 kgs, and then you have these rare monster populations which range from 200-350 kgs. Usually "feral pig" populations will ultimately revert to their "wild boar" origins, so that is why aussie feral pigs are 80-150 kgs. That is indicative of the wild boars they descend from. Argentinian feral pigs do tend to be larger and do probably descend at least in part from Ussuri boars. Maybe californian hogs are the same, I haven't heard much about them. Overall it is important to understand that being "genuine wild boars" or "feral pigs" isn't a big distinction, some wild boar populations are wusses, and some feral pig populations are hardcore. Size also is all over the place. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 17:29:09 GMT
Pig sticker knives usually have a blade that is 14-17 inches long. Long enough, evidently. And logically, I mean their heart and lungs will not be that deep beneath their rib cage. Your downplay attempts are always insanely transparent and desperate reaches which weaken your overall argument and make you look like a fool. If you assert yourself as someone obviously TRYING so hard to make dogs look bad it just crushes your credibility. You should fake being complimentary and concede points occasionally to bolster your trustworthiness and credibility in a general sense. Just a tip. Didn't know hunting knifes were that large, but did the guy really get under the Buffalo to stab it's lungs? . You don't need to get "under" them, the absolute best place to stab any quadruped is directly behind the shoulder on the side of their body, will potentially get the heart with the right angle and will definitely at least get the lungs. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 17:45:41 GMT
Didn't know hunting knifes were that large, but did the guy really get under the Buffalo to stab it's lungs? . You don't need to get "under" them, the absolute best place to stab any quadruped is directly behind the shoulder on the side of their body, will potentially get the heart with the right angle and will definitely at least get the lungs. Easy to do if the Buffalo (they don't have rather poor senses of hearing) is distracted by a Dog and can't see you coming, i give credits where credit is good, congrats for that dog for distracting it long enough to stab it, but i disagree with you for saying it was all the Dog's doing and that the Hunter didn't do anything. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 17:58:28 GMT
"Distracting" isn't what lugging dogs do, that is what bay dogs do. Hypothetically you could sneak a stab on a distracted beast, sure, but that isn't what hunters do. If they did they would regularly die. Guys who hunt with catch dogs and knives rely on the dog to truly have the quarry subjugated and unable to fight back. So you can walk over and do whatever you want to the buffalo or boar, maybe stab it, maybe tie it up, maybe castrate it, whatever. The point is it is safe to walk up and walk around the animal because it has the fight taken out of it. That is not "distracted", again with distracting you want curs or hounds or even collies or heelers or whatever, dogs that refrain from engaging, then the distracted animal can be shot and the dogs aren't in danger. Two different things.
That is not to say the human "did nothing". The human is killing the animal, no bones about it, the human is 100% killing the animal and the dog is not. However, it has drained the fight out of the beast, and made it "safe". That is what they used to be named after. Presa, Fila, Mastiff.. all these words mean "arrest" "subdue" and "make tame and mild" and etc. It is not "distracting".
Separately, in reality when a dog has drained the fight out of a beast and made it mild and safe to handle, it is often the case that the dog possibly could clumsily and shittily carry on and kill the animal. It is often defeated at that point and no longer a threat, even if maybe it is no where near dead. It would be messy and sloppy and unethical and fucked up to let the dog kill it, but often it probably could kill it because it is no longer defending itself and no longer fighting.
Admittedly it is also not the same thing as killing. These dogs we talk about are not designed to kill these animals, and they are often bad at it. This is true. Also subjugated animals are often very very far away from death.
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 18:06:18 GMT
"Distracting" isn't what lugging dogs do, that is what bay dogs do. Hypothetically you could sneak a stab on a distracted beast, sure, but that isn't what hunters do. If they did they would regularly die. Guys who hunt with catch dogs and knives rely on the dog to truly have the quarry subjugated and unable to fight back. So you can walk over and do whatever you want to the buffalo or boar, maybe stab it, maybe tie it up, maybe castrate it, whatever. The point is it is safe to walk up and walk around the animal because it has the fight taken out of it. That is not "distracted", again with distracting you want curs or hounds or even collies or heelers or whatever, dogs that refrain from engaging, then the distracted animal can be shot and the dogs aren't in danger. Two different things. That is not to say the human "did nothing". The human is killing the animal, no bones about it, the human is 100% killing the animal and the dog is not. However, it has drained the fight out of the beast, and made it "safe". That is what they used to be named after. Presa, Fila, Mastiff.. all these words mean "arrest" "subdue" and "make tame and mild" and etc. It is not "distracting". Separately, in reality when a dog has drained the fight out of a beast and made it mild and safe to handle, it is often the case that the dog possibly could clumsily and shittily carry on and kill the animal. It is often defeated at that point and no longer a threat, even if maybe it is no where near dead. It would be messy and sloppy and unethical and fucked up to let the dog kill it, but often it probably could kill it because it is no longer defending itself and no longer fighting. Admittedly it is also not the same thing as killing. These dogs we talk about are not designed to kill these animals, and they are often bad at it. This is true. Also subjugated animals are often very very far away from death. Distracting, if gone well usually leads to the person/animal thinking "yeah, this is not worth it" and backing off. Can be a Buffalo thinking a Dog is not worth the effort, or a fly repeteadly dodging a human trying to kill it until the Human decides it's not worth it. An exhausted Buffalo may decide to stop engaging after it's exhausted, as long as it thinks it's Life is not in danger. Wounded and debilitated animals often get more agressive than healthy animals, as their Life is at higher risk. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Oct 1, 2023 18:21:20 GMT
Ok?
So you may wish to argue distracting dogs would be better for buffalos than lugging dogs. That would be an interesting argument. What you can't do is argue that bull arabs are "distracting" dogs. No, they aren't. They do what they do, and it is not distract.
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 18:27:08 GMT
Ok? So you may wish to argue distracting dogs would be better for buffalos than lugging dogs. That would be an interesting argument. What you can't do is argue that bull arabs are "distracting" dogs. No, they aren't. They do what they do, and it is not distract. No, lugging Dogs are superior since lugging is a more advanced and direct form of distraction. Actually it's in between an all-out attack and a distraction |
|
|
|
Post by s on Oct 1, 2023 18:29:50 GMT
Think of lugging/poking as in between an actual full-scale attack and mere distraction/annoyance
|
|
ophio
Ruminant
Posts: 230
|
Post by ophio on Oct 1, 2023 18:35:55 GMT
Might be more of a size thing then. The boars in California, Texas, and the other southeastern states can get as large as ussuri boars if not larger. Ussuri boar infusion can make feral pigs huge, but so can recent tame bacon pig infusion. "Hogzilla" weighed over 1000 lbs but obviously was recently infused with tame pig or even a stray pig itself- Domestic pigs bred for meat production reach 800-1000 lbs habitually. So that can confuse matters size wise. It seems 80-150 kgs is the normal range for most populations, then you have shrunken populations like meditteranian boars and indonesian boars where adult males are often 50 kgs, and then you have these rare monster populations which range from 200-350 kgs. Usually "feral pig" populations will ultimately revert to their "wild boar" origins, so that is why aussie feral pigs are 80-150 kgs. That is indicative of the wild boars they descend from. Argentinian feral pigs do tend to be larger and do probably descend at least in part from Ussuri boars. Maybe californian hogs are the same, I haven't heard much about them. Overall it is important to understand that being "genuine wild boars" or "feral pigs" isn't a big distinction, some wild boar populations are wusses, and some feral pig populations are hardcore. Size also is all over the place. I'm inclined to believe that the pigs in coastal california are descended from russian boars because they were all introduced by one guy. www.mchsmuseum.com/boar.html especially because that area in California is currently famous for their large boars but never for pig hunting. Buying Russian boar and introducing them into America doesn't seem an uncommon practice and I wouldn't doubt it happened in Australia too. |
|
