Hoggone 2.0 Feral Hog Comments Necessary

USDA/APHIS/WILDLIFE SERVICES published a request for public comment about upcoming Sodium Nitrite field trials for feral hog control. These will take place in the fall if there is significant support from people like you.

PLEASE COMMENT! Soon. It�s easy. Only a few sentences are necessary. As of 9 AM July 14th, there were nine comments. Eight in opposition, and one in favor. Only two appear to have read the proposal or are familiar with the threats posed by feral hogs. Comments are accepted through July 29, 2019.

Immediately below is the Notice of Availability for Public Comment. Click on the link, go the the bottom Right corner, click on the �Comment Now� box, and submit your comments in support of field testing and eventual approval of NaNO2 as an effective tool in controlling feral hogs.

Over one hundred of you did in 2017. Time to step up again.

Read others comments:
Here.

Comment directly here:
Comment directly

Thank you,
R.F.

https://www.timesrecordnews.com/sto...eral-hog-poison-testing-texas/629868002/

Bird deaths a setback in Texas feral hog poison testing
"Field testing of a new feral hog control method experienced a major setback recently after nearly 200 birds were found dead."

Thanks for the reply, my understanding this is an improved compound

"Improvements to the bait and changes to the study protocol were made to increase the effectiveness of the product now referred to as HOGGONE� 2.0"

One problem I see is the expense of the feed system that was supposed to keep off target animals out. Which as shown has already failed in the first trial. There will be people that instead will apply the bait openly and illegally or even worse make up their own concoction with similar ingredients. Much like is currently done with Blue Malrin and is surely being done already with Warfarin due to the publicity of the last failed hog poison. Actions on private land is almost impossible to know about or enforce. To poison an animal that travels across a property line is no different than throwing the poison onto your neighbors property.

The economic impact to hunters, hunting equipment manufacturers, leases, meat processors, guides and outfitters, feed stores, etc. will out weigh other losses at this point. Many landowners have learned how to turn this naturalized animal into revenue. To legalize a hog poison would effect livelihoods of a lot of people and the off label use that will happen would create a danger to people, pets, and other wildlife.

And the supposed 'improvements'....are?????

"and submit your comments in support of field testing and eventual approval of NaNO2 as an effective tool in controlling feral hogs."

Watching politicians I have this part figured out....they make you start out with a false premise in their arguments - this is a prime example. I commented but surely not "in support...". Targeted poisoning has NEVER worked as planned on ANY species. Let's stop with the ignorance already.

From the comment section:

"Please. Please. Why is this even necessary? These animals have the right to live without being poisoned. Please stop this.
Can�t they be resettled? Why are they called feral swine? Does this mean wild boar?"



Lady Please, Please...do a little research before commenting.

Where exactly would we 'resettle' a few million hogs to...?

Well I commented, hope they don't do it.

I'm for continued 'research'...I just don't want anyone to try and 'Fast Track' a product like was done last time.

The 'delivery system' is going to be the problem (collateral death of other animals) and also the potential issue of what to do with 'carcasses'. It's not a good thing to have a bunch of decaying hog carcasses in/around water sources. The hogs will simply die wherever they die. And you can't just set up bait sites far away from water sources (and be successful). Then there is the inevitable misuse of the product that will surface in several forms.

I remain skeptical it can (in its present form) be used outside of State/Federal owned (and managed) lands with any degree of success. But I am not opposed to continued research into it.

The delivery system has always been the problem because they can't find a taxon-specific poison. So far, they can't seem to find a bait system that doesn't kill a bunch of other things.

Dead carcasses? Last time, IIRC, they were expecting to have to police up the carcasses and bury them deeply or burn them...that was the remedy to the carcass problem.

Personally, I think an attractive 'bounty system' would put a huge dent in them.

But would also bring out every poacher and hog dogger in Texas. Sighhhhhhhh.

Yeah, definitely in opposition to this one. It WILL KILL UNINTENDED TARGETS. There is no question about that. Extensive trapping and hunting can put a dent in it. These landowners that say they have such a problem and then ask for $250 a night to come and shoot their hogs. The sport has been monetized and now people dont actually want them exterminated. Show me someone that lets people come kill hogs for free and change my mind.

I wish there were hogs in the part of Irion county where I hunt, I would love some pork in my freezer.

Thanks for posting. But if your intent was to get support you probably should have read past comments about this subject. The vast majority of people on this forum are against putting poison on their hunting grounds.

I submitted a comment against the use of poisons in any form.

I am curious why the opposition to small scale testing/study. I've read nearly all the comments and seems some have conflated 'testing' with 'use'.

I was further confused by some comments stating they were against testing because of certain unknowns and then ending their comment saying the product needed more testing. Huh?

I think there is still confusion between this product (Sodium Nitrite) and previous studies (Warfarin and also a different version of Nitrite). My objection then...was the attempt to Fast Track the product and get it out on the market. With nearly all the testing having been done by a Sister Company to the one producing the product.

I am in favor of continued TESTING in order to see IF they can come up with something effective that can be used under certain conditions.

There are a host of potential problems related to USEAGE that would need to be considered. Therein lies the downfall...if you ask me. But inroads to finding a lethally toxic substance to feral hogs might be found if testing is allowed and encouraged. No one would be required to use it....it would just be a 'tool' to be employed where circumstance makes good sense.

There is little information available at present for the those promoting it to offer the public. We can't really make informed decisions without benefit of testing.

So....I'm all for testing, but want to see complete and HONEST results.

I understand we are talking about testing vs usage. However, there is no way I can be convinced it will be safe. What will happen is it will get approved and we'll find out the ramifications of the decision 5-10 years down the line.

How many commercials to you see on a daily basis for a class action lawsuit against a drug maker or chemical company? All of those products were approved by a government entity and deemed 'safe' for use at some point. In the end we're talking about putting poison into our environment and I just don't trust it.

I believe the study or the way the results are presented will be biased. How many of you that used the link to make a comment of disapproval actually had your comment show up on the public comment list? Maybe mine will eventually show up, but there have been several show up dated later than mine and all are in approval.

But that is the whole point

You'll never eradicate animals as prolific as feral pigs with poison, without eradicating other species.

I don't understand how anyone could support this.

Did anyone take the time to actually read the Environmental Assessment Draft for the proposed study before making their decision to comment?

'Eradicate' other species (I.E. collateral mortality)....seriously?

I would ask folks to remember the solicitation is for the STUDY/TESTING of the toxicant NOT acceptance of its possible future use.

Read the Draft and you will see that several agencies will be involved in the study and that multiple 'concerns' are recognized and will be monitored.

I am in support of the 'study' if for no other reasons than these:

1. It will provide more and better information than previous studies. It is very limited in scale (One site in Texas, one site in Alabama) targeting specific sounders (about 100 total).

2. The study will do one of two things: Affirm that modifications make the product more plausible OR put a nail in the coffin of Hoggone.

I have serious concerns about the actual USE of the product, but am open minded enough to want to see additional studies conducted.

Please read:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=APHIS-2019-0042-0001

We put 'poisons/insecticides/herbicides/etc.....into our environment every day. The vast majority of which are safe when properly used. IF/WHEN a product is discovered to have complications...then it is promptly investigated.

Again, I don't see it ever being used on a wide scale and would NOT use it myself (if available to the public) but I can see no harm in further 'testing' which is the subject of the solicitation.

Sparta Wrote:



^^^^

This is the reason it would terrify me to ever have a 'jury trial' (where I was the defendant).

When folks already have their minds made up....before looking at the evidence or considering new evidence.

I'm only recommending we make 'informed' decisions and feel strongly that at present....there just isn't enough information for anyone to come to conclusions.

I have very real reservations myself....but I'm in favor of continuing studies to support or refute those concerns.

You just can't trust the government with stuff like this.

DDT was safe, according to the government, wasn't it?

I have seen and personally delt with, in my life more times than I can remember, the narrative being set in conflict with the truth to justify the means.

If it is supported by enough wealth it will pass! And we will pay for it down the road.

The last test should have been the nail in the coffin but it wasn't. That should tell you something!

If you support the testing then let them start on your land or lease.

Hoggone 2.0 is a registered trademark and they are pushing it on a global scale. You never know who could really be behind it or how much money is actually behind it. All you know is it is poison and it failed initial testing comically.

If you continue to allow testing it will pass regardless of the outcome.

I would have no problem with this. Again, you've not read the study guidelines, means, methods and controls....have you?

My objection to the first round of testing (besides collateral mortality to non-target species) was exactly for the MONEY aspect of it. It was painfully clear that the product was being 'fast tracked' and promoted by certain folks for monetary gain.

The toxicant itself did not fail to kill pigs. The delivery system (which a 3 year old could of told you would fail) was the issue and remains a concern for me.

Changes in the delivery system, the percent of toxicant used (now 1/2 what was used before), heavier coating, than before, the elimination of ground seeds (that attract birds), compartments in the hopper (instead of just free laying toxicant), no more use of whole kernel corn on top, etc...are all things you would know about if you had read the proposal.

Studies using placebo bait and various other control methods will be employed. The study as proposed (THIS TIME) is actually well thought out. And well it should be because the last attempt was a fiasco. When you get your [censored] handed to you in that kind of fashion....you had better come back a second time with all your ducks in a row.

If you are convinced that if there is enough money involved it will inevitably be passed, then you have already lost the battle, right? So....why not have the benefit of testing results?

I've read it and still have a problem with it. Now if there was a way to create a poison that would only kill hogs, I'd be ok with the testing. There is a toxicity chart in the report that shows it is more toxic to whitetail deer than hogs (big problem). My guess is this will get approved at some point. They will fail at the testing a few more times and eventually figure out how to pass in their controlled environment. Like you I'm very concerned about the delivery method. If food is available other animals are going to figure out a way to get to it.

We could tell this lady about my hog resettling program...I have successfully resettled countless feral pigs to my dinner plate!

Take a look at the buffalo. They were brought to the brink of extinction by over-hunting. I could be done with pigs too. But, it would have to be done on a very large scale, with ALL properties within the area targeted to participate, and there would have to be a large enough bounty to get enough "bounty hunters" to participate.

The toxicity to whitetail immediately caught my eye as well and they are going to have to come up with something that has VERY low rates of Collateral Kills or it is a non-starter as far as I am concerned.

I just don't see how they are going to overcome the myriad of other issues that are bound to arise. (misuse of the product, carcass disposal, access to the poison resulting from vomitus, etc)

Just so we are clear...I am very much skeptical it will prove itself and personally don't like the idea of poisoning large mammals to begin with, but I'm willing to look at the results from small scale studies.

Anyway, glad you read the literature (its a long read) and Thank You for your thoughts on it.

Flint.

Not even a close comparison....Buffalos are big dumb animals that live in the open plains. We could wipe out every buffalo on the planet in 24 hours. Not being a jerk, just sayin'.

No comparison! How often do you see roadkill pigs on the side of the road compared to, say, whitetail deer? They are alot smarter and they breed faster, hide better, more weary. I don't normally see hogs on the roadside unless there has recently been some very heavy rain, compared to pretty much everything else that crawl I see almost every day.

I don't believe this is even a real person's opinion. I think it was posted by someone affiliated with hoggone that is doing their best to make those in opposition look like a bunch of clueless fools.

The testing will be used to justify the means and they will play with the statistics to sort them in a way, somehow, to make it appear acceptable. This os what the government does. It is how gun control legislation is passed. They will pull the wool over the eyes of the sheeple. I might be crazy but I know I am right about this.


By the way, I absolutely read and understood it. I don't think the birds or other animals are coming specifically to the seeds/corn in most cases. They are going straight after the peanut paste and little capsules the same as birds go after rocks.

Peanut paste is the clincher. Peanut paste? You really think that doesn't attract everything that lives in the woods?

Do me a favor amd smear some peanut butter on a tree next time you are in the woods. It is like crack to squirrels, deer, anything that likes acorns will Loooove peanut paste. It's like concentrated legumes on steroids. I mean it is literally concentrated legumes.

Here is a brief summary of Hoggone 2.0 from my point of view:

They double the coating and cut the dose in half? What I get from that is they just put a thicker coating on it. The stuff they are using could be carnauba wax, parraffin... who knowes? Every heard of "pan coated disks" (m&m's). They use flashy words but in layman's terms it is pretty much the exact same chemical with a thicker coating of some sorr of candy/sugar or wax. Something digestable that is ised to coat medication that taste bad. That could be all the difference they need to achieve half dosage really.

All that means to me is instead of making it some 2-4 and a half hours to die, a pig could live longer and cover more ground and spread it further!

And the "special delivery system" come on. They put it in a smaller trays/receptacles on the ground.

The corn- great, there is no corn anymore. They claim the corn is exactly what some pigs are after in the first place and not the peanut paste but also what the other animals were after? Almost every mammal in the woods loves that stuff. It's a joke.

Birds will avoid eating those pills the same way they avoid eating lead fishing sinkers- they won't avoid it at all. The scent and the activity around the trough will lure them in and their little bird brains/instincts will trigger them to eat the little capsules.

It doesn't seem to me they changed much if anything at all. They are just gonna keep throwing money at it until it gets approved. Same thing pharmaceuitical companies do.

Oh and one more thing- did no one stop to think for a second that a thicker coating would just make it even more palatable to other animals that are more finicky that hogs, which will literally eat corn mixed with diesel fuel?

How can you not see there is something fishy about this whole deal.

"A new delivery system" is laughable! It is practically the same delivery system scaled down, minus the corn. Unreal

I especially don't want it on state or federal managed lands. If you are not opposed to continued research then they can do it on your place!

And finally, is there nothing you noticed suspicious about the OP of this thread? He's got 5 posts in the forum, two in this thread, and started postin not month before creating this thread.

"Seems like dove weather out there today." In the middle of july? Dove season starts in September!

Out of nowhere a new guy named after this guy as far as I can tell:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sanford_Foster

joins the forum and attempts to rally support for testing this "new" chemical and there is nothing new about it.

Already said once, I am fine with that. It's a short term study involving a targeted 100 hogs in two different climate/geographic areas. It's just a little Sodium Nitrite (you eat it every time you consume cured meats) , nothing Nuclear going on here. And its not the Government doing this...they are just one group involved in overseeing it (which admittedly isn't too comforting).

But yeah, if they need a place to test it...I'm all in.

Well I gotta respect that

Bingo! If folks would stop ponying up their cash to hunt a problem species, we might see a better dent in the population. Should be a matter of asking for help, then managing the number of hunters on property at any given time for safety concerns.

I'm guessing you are not a Land Owner with a hog problem?

It's actually pretty difficult to find responsible, effective, caring folks (the caliber of DNS for example) to hunt pigs.

Hell.....all of us Land Owners could let average Joe Hunter (with a hankering to rid me of all my hogs) on the property and achieve little more than running them over to the neighbors place.

If I just wanted the hogs gone for awhile (ran off of MY property, but becoming my neighbors problem) I'd just bring in some Hog-Doggers once a month. They would catch exactly one hog (if they have good dogs), spread the others out...and educate ALL of them. But at least I wouldn't have to worry about them shooting one of my Calves, leaving gates open, etc.....

If you get to looking $200-$250 is actually a pretty good price. Most places with good hogs cost more.

I don't buy in to the hog problem either, not from the perspective of damage to property.

I understand the liability, but let's be honest- if you had a problem with hogs that bad, you'd probably assume the risk of an occasional accident to rid yourself of a nuisance.

If your hogs are not killing enough calves or damaging enough crops to justify in your mind letting a hunter in that may or may not have an accident of some kind, then you must not have a hog problem.

Same with any other kind of invasive species.

If it is a source of revenue then it is not a problem.

"Oh well that huner will probably run em all off on to the neighbors place"

If you and your neighbors have it that bad then why can't ya'll just put your heads together and do a occasional german style driven hunt. I think that would be awesome.

Especially if you gotta pay to play. An old school driven hunt would be a blast!

It's clear to me....you don't know your A$$ from page 8 about hogs, hog hunting or the destruction to property hogs are capable of.

Equally clear....you are not a Land Owner with hogs. But ramble on...........

Equally clear- you want $200-$400 a gun PER DAY to shoot pigs on your place then you don't have a hog problem!

Worried about hunters running them into the neighbor's place until he pulls out some cold hard cash!

Willing to pay for poison but not gonna let a hunter on your place without paying good money- so scares to see a guy get a free pass you'd rather put out poison. That is shameful.

If I were a land owner I'd make hunters pay good money to shoot pigs on my place too, but I would not sit there and bash them and put out poison, etc.

For the kind of money most are asking to "help out with these pigs" I hope they tear your place apart!

I can see both sides of the argument, As a landowner, I wouldn’t want to bring hunters of unknown ability and ethics onto my land. I also don’t want my neighbor using toxins that may end up effecting my land or water tanks. The term “safe toxin” is an oxymoron. There is no such thing. Read the extensive labeling on any toxin and you will always see potential side effects. The problems frequently don’t materialize right away and seldom appear in short term studies.
Round Up was suppose to be safe for weed control and is still widely used for agricultural and home use, but after widespread use over an extended period of time it was discovered that it can cause cancer to unsuspecting users.

The potential for 'mis-use' is perhaps my greatest concern. Then too...the 'delivery system' itself (at present) is something less than perfected...to put it mildly.

When I think of of my Brother-in-law (a more perfect moron never walked this earth) and the idea that he could get his hands on a Toxin like this one, it just scares me to death. So...I certainly have reservations as well.

There are a lot of Brother-in-laws that fit that criteria.lol

The "delivery system" didn't change.

It's the same peanut paste in a smaller receptacle. They didn't add corn, whoo-pee.

The penut paste is the most attractive ingredient to wildlife, not the corn. Pretty much anything on four legs with fur loves that stuff.

I totally get why you don't let just anybody on your land. I would not either. I damn sure dont let just anybody in my house.

But there has to be a few people that you know and trust that are willing to help if it's so bad you want to use poison. Why not a trap?

Some videos on youtube using the big round traps on some kind of spiral trigger, set off from your cellphone when you see enough pigs inn there.

So you can let them get used to it over time and when they get lazy, bam!

Trapping and snaring have been the two most successful methods for me. I also have two dedicated 'hog stands' with feeders that run year 'round and LED lights on large car batteries and photocells.

And you are correct....the proposed delivery system is so little changed as to be laughable. And we are in agreement about the peanut paste being an attractant for just about anything that walks, crawls or flies. Decades ago...we used to screw the lid of a peanut butter jar to a tree, cut the bottom out of the (plastic) jar and screw it back onto the lid. Deer would flock to it. As would coons, squirrels, birds...........

I've been battling hogs on my property for about 30 years. Some years more successfully than others, but they just keep making more.

If you have the time:

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/not-again-feral-hog-control-in-east-texas.449721/

Probably been said before. Put a bounty on them like coyotes years ago up north. Use all the money they spend for surveys, tests, and the product and pay hunters. Me and my cousins made a pile of money on coyotes.

Seems pretty simple to this man.

That has always been my assertion too. Put a meaningful bounty on them and folks will start killing them left and right.

Trouble is....that would bring its own set of problems in the form of trespassers and likely would bring the Hog-Doggers out in full force (which are already a different kind of plague around here).

That's been done in a few counties in Texas a few times. Several years ago in Lee County (where I do most of my hunting) we'd give the hog tails to a neighbor who would freeze them until she had enough to make a trip worthwhile and then she'd cash them in. I knew second hand of some guys who worked at a livestock auction where there were lots of cattle and a lot of cattle feed strewn around. The hogs came in virtually every night. These guys reportedly made more money trapping the hogs (selling them to a live hog buyer) and collecting the bounty than they did working at the auction. Lee County ran out of bounty money before the middle of the year.

Hayes county has had bounties on hogs a few times also, although I don't hunt there as often. The problem has always been finding the money with which to pay the bounties. The city folk don't necessarily like their tax money going to help the people who live out of the city. It's sort of a "It ain't a problem for me …" mentality, and there are always road and drainage projects that require attention.