Thread: Deer in Southern areas?

There's an interesting episode of Meateater, where Steve talks about the folly of the hunter's idea of "if I don't get to eat it, it's wasted" He then points out a list of possible scenarios where other creatures we share the planet with benefit from energy in an animal carcass. I'll admit, it's much easier in an American context where there are large native scavengers and preditors, but I'll give it a go.

The deer you shoot and only take backstraps and fillets creates a massive colony of insects, and some carrion birds feed on it. Other native birds then feed on all the insects, they become fat, and fertile, and have a more successful nesting season. Their offspring spread out, distributing nutrients further around the forest, creating growth for Kereru and other browsers. Some become prey for Falcons, helping them to have successful nests. Nature doesn't really "waste" anything, and at the current population levels in some places, this way of thinking about it might be beneficial.

In saying that, I also see the benefit to hunting perception of eating as much as we can. There are also alot of guys out there who have no problem taking no meat off a stag and just walking away with his head. Life is complicated.

Back in November my son and I hunted a favourite spot on the West Coast. On the first day we saw about 80 deer - mostly in 3 large groups of yearlings as they had recently been chased off by their mums. So for every one of those yearlings, nearby there was a more than likely pregnant hind = around 240 deer, and this was in a very small area in one valley, probably no more than a square kilometre.

We never bothered venturing further up the valley to see how many were there.

We shot 9 over 4 days but could have shot more. Obviously couldn’t carry 9 deer so were selective in what we took. Wasteful? Sure was, but not as wasteful as DOC hitting the valley with 1080, and the number we shot will not even go close to slowing the population growth, let alone reducing it.

It is a simple equation. Either hunters need to shoot more animals to help control the population, or the control will be taken out of our hands.

Originally Posted by Sauer

Wasteful? Sure was, but not as wasteful as DOC hitting the valley with 1080

I absolutely agree with your general sentiments (although I don't see that kind of numbers on the West Coast! That is a concerningly high density of deer.) but I'd like to note that 1080 is not used to target deer anymore (since back in the forest service days, ish). There are no DOC 1080 drops with deer as a target species; there may be a lack of concern at some deer bykill in 1080 operations happening for other reasons (possum/predator control) but 1080 is absolutely not dropped for the purpose of killing deer. People may have the opinion that it is, but that is factually incorrect and it does hunters a disservice to repeat factually incorrect opinions, it undermines our credibility.

DOC currently does very little deer control anywhere, and this has been the case for a long time, where it does occur the chosen method is generally aerial S&D - e.g. Kaweka Mountain Beech, Raukumara, Fiordland Takehe area etc.

Read that a few days back, a bit all over the place but not the worst hunting article produced by Newsroom by a long shot.
Moral of story: shoot more hinds people.
And goats.

Really saying they don’t target deer is just playing with words. Most valleys have possums, stoats, rats and mice. Of course they won’t say they’re targeting deer, but the by-kill still happens. How many ‘Mast years’ have we had in the last decade?

If you want an example, go for a walk downstream from the main road at the Waikukupa River. Some prime deer territory in there during Spring, but you will be very lucky to find one in there. I asked a local farmer why this was and his answer was it sees regular poisoning to stop TB spreading south past this area. Not specifically targeting deer, but they are not there in any numbers all the same.

A couple of years ago I was shown a video of a herd of deer running across a saddle in North Canterbury. There would have been approx a hundred deer in this herd. This particular area is part of the Arthur’s Pass East block that now sees regular poisoning. Go and see if you can find those deer numbers in there now.

Not all deer poisonings get the publicity of the Molesworth event, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

Originally Posted by Sauer

Really saying they don’t target deer is just playing with words. Most valleys have possums, stoats, rats and mice.

Yes - and the places that get 1080 (from DOC) are typically targetting those that have high priority species to protect from those predators, not the areas with the highest deer numbers at all.

It certainly would be a waste of money to drop 1080 in parts of Arthur's Pass for example if you wanted to target deer, but the drops happen, to protect Orange Fronted Parakeets/Mohua etc.

See the Nelson Lakes NP situation for how DOC is working with hunters for management in an area where there have been reports of high deer numbers.

Yes, deer die from 1080 - no, the drops are not targetting deer. It is an important difference in the conversation about management.

Originally Posted by NRT

Like accessing through Cattle Flat station to land locked DOC block that has deer galore

Easy access to mataura range, east dome on the other hand is no access unless you raft down the river. Ridiculous amount of deer through that area, below average antler quality too worse than the ruahines.

So much landlocked doc land down here it's no wonder the numbers are building up so high. Needs to be a law where access must be granted for any landlocked public land.

In north, people share ownership for a boat since nobody will go out every weekend. How many in south would like share ownership of Huey helo? Anybody...
I respect landowner, that is their land. Just do `t know why they block the access to public land.

Originally Posted by Black Rabbit

In north, people share ownership for a boat since nobody will go out every weekend. How many in south would like share ownership of Huey helo? Anybody...
I respect landowner, that is their land. Just do `t know why they block the access to public land.

They block the access to public land because they get sick to death of idiots that don't leave things how they find them when they go through their land, shoot their stock, hunt on their land without permission, leave bottles and shit everywhere, rip up their paddocks and destroy tracks with their retarded jacked up Toyota surfs etc etc. People don't just wake up one day and decide to make things difficult for others, their attitude is a direct reflection of their experience.

In addition to the observations about access challenges across private property, I'd observe that generally speaking DoC could do way more by being more permissive with aerial access for rec hunters. @gimp noted the recent arrangement in Nelson Lakes Nat Park, and the Sika Fioundation have achieved some concessions in the Kaimanawas and Kaweka's, but heaps more could be done.

A while ago now, but the farcical (in my view) position DoC adpted around allowing AATH in wilderness areas, but not allowing rec hunters to be dropped into the same areas told us plenty about DoC's real attitude to rec hunting at that time. As noted above here have been improvements since, but inchworm progress in the scheme of things.

As we've all seen from our PM, 'virtue signalling' is a core leadership attribute now, it seems? DoC could try some towards hunters?

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

shoot their stock, hunt on their land without permission, , rip up their paddocks

Figured. Thought maybe something else I could `t knew as out-lander. Really, shoot farmer `s stock? by accident, or intentional? No compensations to farmers at all, a sheep is `t that expensive. Alright, do `t want become another xxx. Want to make sure with you guys, so here is the scenario.

Someday, I miscalculated on map because compass reading, and walked into a private land, sadly killed or injured a sheep or cow by accident, and I find the landlord or he/ she finds me, and then I say "sorry" , willing to pay for the damages. So, what `s the odds they will accept me to come again?

Originally Posted by Black Rabbit

Figured. Thought maybe something else I could `t knew as out-lander. Really, shoot farmer `s stock? by accident, or intentional? No compensations to farmers at all, a sheep is `t that expensive. Alright, do `t want become another xxx. Want to make sure with you guys, so here is the scenario.

Someday, I miscalculated on map because compass reading, and walked into a private land, sadly killed or injured a sheep or cow by accident, and I find the landlord or he/ she finds me, and then I say "sorry" , willing to pay for the damages. So, what `s the odds they will accept me to come again?

Assuming you mean "by accident" with a firearm, I would be telling you to f off and calling the police. If you are incompentent enough to injure or kill a sheep or cow by accident I don't want you anywhere near my property.

A sheep is worth from $150 for a lamb to several thousand dollars for a stud ram, cows are worth from a few hundred for a weaner calf to thousands

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

They block the access to public land because they get sick to death of idiots that don't leave things how they find them when they go through their land, shoot their stock, hunt on their land without permission, leave bottles and shit everywhere, rip up their paddocks and destroy tracks with their retarded jacked up Toyota surfs etc etc. People don't just wake up one day and decide to make things difficult for others, their attitude is a direct reflection of their experience.

I suspect those types are not like me and others who ask in person if they can access the DOC land via the farmers land?

I for one would treat access via private land as a privilege to be treasured and not abused.

Originally Posted by Cigar

Assuming you mean "by accident" with a firearm, I would be telling you to f off and calling the police. If you are incompentent enough to injure or kill a sheep or cow by accident I don't want you anywhere near my property.

A sheep is worth from $150 for a lamb to several thousand dollars for a stud ram, cows are worth from a few hundred for a weaner calf to thousands

Come down.. chill. Just ask, the "F" word would `t be necessary. As said, any damage will be covered and beyond. If it was me caused loses, 150 dollars, 1,500 dollars or more, we can talk nicely to solve it, Only an accident, can I?
Alright, by what you said sir, I shall stay away from farmland. Again, just assumption, now I knew. Have nice weekend.

Cheers

Difficult to imagine any legit scenario where a person could accidentally harm livestock while hunting outside of gross negligence/incompetence/malice; quite unforgivable