Thread: do you shoot hinds???

Originally Posted by Tahr

No. As stated previously. If they wanted to target deer they would modify the rate, concentration and bait, and devastate them. But its not approved for use in that way. Yes, there is often a by-kill but that is a lot different to specific targeting.

1080 is nasty but necessary for the battle against the little critters - we just need to keep up the fight for repellent and funding for alternatives.

Exactly and I'll happily come out and say I fucking hate 1080 especially in areas of significance but no point being disengenuous or ignorant with claims. I think it's heavily misused ie it would be far more effective to pick a few areas and target the shit out of them keeping pest numbers low rather than sprinkling a hit here and there and doing nothing in the long term. I'd not be sad at all if we saw 1080 banned but as much as its shit this anti 1080 crap and abusing DOC workers (removing wheel nuts, thresting them, dumping pig carcasses in their carparks) is worse. not to mention many of those workers are and aren't even involved in poisoning.

Originally Posted by Stocky

Not true there are many other reasons not to include it including cost and labour... I'm not saying they arent happy with the results of not including repellant but stretching the truth into something it's not is the tool of the antihunting woke bridgade we as hunters should be better than that.

The repellant is dried blood powder. It is very easy to add to the grain mix before the meal goes through the pelleter. Just the same as adding a couple of bags of APR or Dairy / stud, mineral mix. By not adding it and flying areas where animals are and avoiding the possumless deerless country the average sowing rate per hectare will be as stated but the rate in the animal populated country will be higher so deer become bykill by design. This nonsense of hand coating pellets is crazy and just an excuse to not do it IMO.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

The repellant is dried blood powder. It is very easy to add to the grain mix before the meal goes through the pelleter. Just the same as adding a couple of bags of APR or Dairy / stud, mineral mix. By not adding it and flying areas where animals are and avoiding the possumless deerless country the average sowing rate per hectare will be as stated but the rate in the animal populated country will be higher so deer become bykill by design. This nonsense of hand coating pellets is crazy and just an excuse to not do it IMO.

I'm not sure but Im pretty sure I told you that on one of our calls. They have also now started mixing deer repellant in at the factory was at the North Canterbury NZDA meeting mentioned effectiveness increases of 50-100% klikely based on what your saying about the BS they was spraying it after manufacture (I don't many guys willing to drop poison that actually care if they get each pellet properly covered. Mixing at the plant is also about 50% cheaper. I think a smart campaign by hunters would be to make it mandatory to include this based on animal cruelty issues. It's far more likely to gain public traction than just banning 1080 which obviously hasn't worked. Similar method to the way anti hunters remove hunting rights they attack it peice by piece.

We agree that the bykill is probably seen as an added benefit and that hand coating pellets is BS and that deer repellant should be mixed at manufacture.

I don't get out after deer as much as I used to hence why I try to load up when I do. I agree tho I can't just take backsteaks. at the bare minimum its back legs and steaks. I don't like to waste meat. Tbh tho any further than a km from the truck I think twice before pulling the trigger 😅.

So this poll seems to suggest the notion that most hunters going out are passing on everything except antlered stags is BS.The main issue is access denied to farmland bordering doc land and lack of bush hunters.

Originally Posted by Stocky

I'm not sure but Im pretty sure I told you that on one of our calls. They have also now started mixing deer repellant in at the factory was at the North Canterbury NZDA meeting mentioned effectiveness increases of 50-100% klikely based on what your saying about the BS they was spraying it after manufacture (I don't many guys willing to drop poison that actually care if they get each pellet properly covered. Mixing at the plant is also about 50% cheaper. I think a smart campaign by hunters would be to make it mandatory to include this based on animal cruelty issues. It's far more likely to gain public traction than just banning 1080 which obviously hasn't worked. Similar method to the way anti hunters remove hunting rights they attack it peice by piece.

We agree that the bykill is probably seen as an added benefit and that hand coating pellets is BS and that deer repellant should be mixed at manufacture.

Regarding the legality of poisoning deer, shifting them from pest / noxious to 'Game' would make poisoning more complicated. Regarding the cruelty aspect, the NZ Veterinary association made a special exception to allow or not oppose poisoning of deer for TB control.
Is it legal or illegal to poison deer now today as I cannot find any of the older references to this anymore ??

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Regarding the legality of poisoning deer, shifting them from pest / noxious to 'Game' would make poisoning more complicated. Regarding the cruelty aspect, the NZ Veterinary association made a special exception to allow or not oppose poisoning of deer for TB control.
Is it legal or illegal to poison deer now today as I cannot find any of the older references to this anymore ??

I think some poisoning is legal but don't have a list of approved poisons mate mentioned that 1080 in it paste form is approved (or was). I imagine there are other approved poisons.