Thread: Auckland deer cull info

Originally Posted by Woody

I took on Taupo Coucil publicly a few years ago when I realised the coucillors had not followed public consultation rules and laws. I suggest you Auckland people get hokd of every conversation leadingvup to and including the council meetings pertaining by using the OIMA. You are entitled to obtain all and every conversation that ANY council staff had at any time keading up to this matter. These include casual discusdions as well as phone calls to staff. Im sure you know what to look for. Get stuck in. I wont be surprised if you find lots of interesting compromising details.

In Taupo I calked for the dismissal of several councillors. This did not happen but I believe they were subjected to a training course in correct proceedures.
You guys might be able to rock the acc boat pretty well ����

Woody, Auckland Council publicly consulted on the new Pest Management Plan in 2018.

Sounds like no hunters botheredcto read it then. Other councils has extermination policies too; notably Tasman Unitary Council.
Opotiki has wilddeer and pigs included as assets and I got same incuded in Taupo some years ago. Hope the twiggy mob there havent sneakily removed it. I know WRC didnt like it goung into Regional LTP. I have left it to others past few years to keep eyes and ears on. Was getting too much for just me.

Yeah, unfortunately it relies on busy hunters and clubs to know and submit.
I didn't even think to, assuming the likes of NZDA and Woodhill Fallow Committee would.
Be interesting to see if they did.
@Allgood?

Such a plan objective could be turned about with correct procedure. Might take a year though, IF hunters can sort out the twiggy infiltrator councillors and "staff planning section".

why would you spend 20m when recreational hunters would do it for free

Originally Posted by Woody

Sounds like no hunters botheredcto read it then. Other councils has extermination policies too; notably Tasman Unitary Council.
Opotiki has wilddeer and pigs included as assets and I got same incuded in Taupo some years ago. Hope the twiggy mob there havent sneakily removed it. I know WRC didnt like it goung into Regional LTP. I have left it to others past few years to keep eyes and ears on. Was getting too much for just me.

Good work. I work regularly in Opotiki, it would take a very brave man to tell the boys there that their deer and pigs were to be exterminated.

I got one of those letters saying they will be shooting in the area.
They wont be doing so on my land.
Those are my tasty treats running around, how dare they?!

Good on you.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

Yeah, unfortunately it relies on busy hunters and clubs to know and submit.
I didn't even think to, assuming the likes of NZDA and Woodhill Fallow Committee would.
Be interesting to see if they did.
@Allgood?

Well when this issue arose recently.... I did ask one of the Auckland NZDA branches if they submitted on the Auckland RPMS. The response was -submitting was a good idea they will put it to the board.

I like wise asked the GAC if they submitted- "We do not have the resources to do everything and our mandate in game animals, most of the Auckland RPMS is likely to be non game animals (except pigs and new herds of deer).

Anyone is entitled to make a submission and I would welcome involvement of others so encourage you to do so if you feel inclined".

I informed the GAC chairman the submissions closed March 2018.

I think the Auckland RPMS thing really highlights genuine recreational hunting advocacy is very very limited.

Originally Posted by Breda

Well when this issue arose recently.... I did ask one of the Auckland NZDA branches if they submitted on the Auckland RPMS. The response was -submitting was a good idea they will put it to the board.

I like wise asked the GAC if they submitted- "We do not have the resources to do everything and our mandate in game animals, most of the Auckland RPMS is likely to be non game animals (except pigs and new herds of deer).

Anyone is entitled to make a submission and I would welcome involvement of others so encourage you to do so if you feel inclined".

I informed the GAC chairman the submissions closed March 2018.

I think the Auckland RPMS thing really highlights genuine recreational hunting advocacy is very very limited.

It doesn't help that its private land. Less of a motivating factor for normal people to submit. And like most local government authorities. The plans are not well publicised.

High conservation values?
It's a pine forrest FFS!

Sent from my SM-G390Y using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Breda

Well when this issue arose recently.... I did ask one of the Auckland NZDA branches if they submitted on the Auckland RPMS. The response was -submitting was a good idea they will put it to the board.

I like wise asked the GAC if they submitted- "We do not have the resources to do everything and our mandate in game animals, most of the Auckland RPMS is likely to be non game animals (except pigs and new herds of deer).

Anyone is entitled to make a submission and I would welcome involvement of others so encourage you to do so if you feel inclined".

I informed the GAC chairman the submissions closed March 2018.

I think the Auckland RPMS thing really highlights genuine recreational hunting advocacy is very very limited.

Damn. Yes unfortunately you need to reading the council website regularly to see what’s coming and to be fair most people switch off because Council overwhelms you with endless consultations.

I was guilty of seeing this one come up, but I was too busy and assumed others would submit.
Allgood will hopefully advise if the Committee was actually treated as a key stakholder throughout this.
They surely can’t have been given what’s in the plan and the fact the ballot has opened.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

Allgood will hopefully advise if the Committee was actually treated as a key stakholder throughout this.
They surely can’t have been given what’s in the plan and the fact the ballot has opened.

I think from reading the plan (once a while ago) it said something like eradication for everywhere within the proposed area- except an area where the council has an agreed management plan in place. Without knowing the area at all I took that to be the Woodhill Forest block. I know little about the forest or it's ballot system, whether costs are involved to participate etc.

Originally Posted by Breda

I think from reading the plan (once a while ago) it said something like eradication for everywhere within the proposed area- except an area where the council has an agreed management plan in place. Without knowing the area at all I took that to be the Woodhill Forest block. I know little about the forest or it's ballot system, whether costs are involved to participate etc.

Yes, you are right, the old ARC plan from 2007 had an exemption. But the new Auckland Council one doesn’t. I’m surprised no one noticed.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

Allgood will hopefully advise if the Committee was actually treated as a key stakeholder throughout this.
They surely can’t have been given what’s in the plan and the fact the ballot has opened.

As is posted elsewhere, the ARC gave the South head herd recognition after representation from WFMC. We were not aware or notified as a 'stake holder' that the 'Super City' reclassified deer in the Auckland region and there was no consultation with us.

Here are some other details that you may not be aware of.....

The ACC rep at the meeting on friday night explained that all they wanted to do basically was to cull deer from the farms adjacent to the Ototoa reserve to protect the boidiversity of that reserve.
Some of you may recall that not so long ago your ballot fee contained a 'fencing levy' which was used by WFMC to fence the Ototoa reserve to protect it. On completion, the fence was 'turned over to DOC/ARC to monitor and maintain. When I asked the 'Pest' representative at the meeting as to why they needed to cull deer from the surrounding properties he replied that the fence had holes in it. No money was ever budgeted for upkeep of the fence from my understanding.
I pointed out that the Council should suspend their cull and use the money to fix the fence so that the deer would be kept out of the biodiversity area rather than send their cullers onto adjacent private property upsetting the locals etc etc.........And that the whole purpose was to keep the deer out so why dont they fix the fence......

He was going to discuss that option with his superior.........but I dont hold out much hope for logic to prevail.

From the tone of the meeting and the locals who presented their views, I doubt if permission will be given to the cullers to continue.