Thread: Maybe need to start shooting everything we see in some areas

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

Can you clarify on that Gibo...how is changing from pest to managed resource will change the volume shot? Assuming that's what you mean

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

I mean if they are treated as a resource then revenue can be gained from that resource. That money can then go towards the management and sustainability of that resource. I think a tag system would be sweet and charge foreigners more for the privilege's

Originally Posted by Gibo

I mean if they are treated as a resource then revenue can be gained from that resource. That money can then go towards the management and sustainability of that resource. I think a tag system would be sweet and charge foreigners more for the privilege's

I like it but have a couple of questions

1. Would the population be reduced?, one assumes yes with money from the tags etc but then still no control over how deep the cull/manage

2. Would you expect us as NZ hunters to buy a tag to hunt a deer....

H

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

I like it but have a couple of questions

1. Would the population be reduced?, one assumes yes with money from the tags etc but then still no control over how deep the cull/manage. Yeah I guess thats part of the manage piece, get the numbers right and then adjust the tag system as needed

2. Would you expect us as NZ hunters to buy a tag to hunt a deer....Yip I guess so once its balanced out. No doubt this is a pipe dream but I wouldnt scoff at 10-20 bucks a tag

H

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

In red bro

Originally Posted by Gibo

In red bro

Fark your good....

No fancy colours for me


I wouldn't pay....just saying

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

Fark your good....

No fancy colours for me


I wouldn't pay....just saying

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

Yeah i'd say heaps would be of that view, dont expect change or anything decent to happen then When they are eradicated you may change your tune

Originally Posted by Gibo

Yeah i'd say heaps would be of that view, dont expect change or anything decent to happen then When they are eradicated you may change your tune

They won't get them all.....you and I know that

Hamish

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

If they paid for tails that would help. Surely it must be worth it to get rid of the horrible deer. Forest and Bird should be sponsoring us. We are the solution. Ta da!

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

I looked but didnt see phone number for access.......also interesting the deer were videoed and not shot....
fifty quid to knob of goat shit anyone trying to access that property of surrounding land will be turned down as a dirty "cunter"...... Miss Chen, thats almost your back yard,maybe you should track them down and see if access is forth coming...

Ive actually sent out a couple of letters for access to private land around the Dunedin and Catlins areas but havent heard back yet, might never hear back. But yeah the catlins public areas are chock full of deer and they do leave their mark. Thats the place I managed to run into a red within 5 meters. Not sure if the properties mentioned in the article are interested in a hunter like me in there, as I just shoot the first thing I find and leave with meat. But if they would let me in I would happily shoot more than 1 if I happen upon more than 1. The little Tautuku forest huts run by forest and bird are a nice place to stay as well. If they let us know problem areas and gave us easy access, hundreds of hunters including myself would even be happy to pay a fee to get some venison.

There are some good people in Doc.
In the top of the south at least they seam to be able to work in with very proactive Nelson and Marlborough NZDAs to reduce numbers in problem areas.
And for the first time in 30-50 years hunters can now fly into NLNP in a block system.
It is expected that you shoot all ungulates you can do humanly and report sightings and kills.

The pessimist in me says this is just letting the hunters have a go before the green rain comes to target the ungulates.
Yes it is illegal to target ungulates with 1080 but we all know it is done in problem areas under the guise off rat or possum numbers.

The optimist in me sees this as having great potential for a real partnership between Doc and hunters in the management of our backcountry.

NI vs SI poses very different problems for controlling wild ungulates.

Foot hunters couldn't control deer 50- 80 years ago when there were real trained "guns' being paid to achieve who could and would live and survive under the harshest conditions. There is only one thing outside poison today to keep numbers under reasonable control which is the good old chopper.

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

The problem is there is a fundamental difference in approach between pest control and hunting. Hunters are you classic sustainable meat harvestors, always in the back of the mind os the need to preserve a sustainable resource. Pest control for something like protecting a threatened conservation area requires total eradication or as close to this as possible. Hunters and conservationists have completely different mindset and priorities. Trophy hunting is worse again, some guys will leave a huge number of animals to try for that one perfect specimen. Reconciling these competing agendas is the issue here. It's much easier for us farmer pest controllers, if it moves, shoot it.

I disagree with one aspect of your statement.
Hunters can be conservationists too. I work in biosecurity, have worked for DoC for a few years as well, and regularly volunteer trapping in the Northern Ruahines and Kawekas. To draw a line in the sand saying you’re a hunter not a conservationist ignores a lot of nuance around why people do the things they do. Some guys shoot whatever they see, others shoot bugger all. But the net effect is on the whole, positive for biodiversity. But only in the fact that a deer is dead.

But I may also be misinterpreting your statement as well.

Determining carrying capacity of an area requires informed data specific to local ecosystem type and maybe indeed by catchment. Figure out the numbers of deer currently in there the best way you can and then aim for having a lower density herd. @Gibo is right in saying that they need to be managed as a resource, but who pays and who says.

Originally Posted by tetawa

Foot hunters couldn't control deer 50- 80 years ago when there were real trained "guns' being paid to achieve who could and would live and survive under the harshest conditions. There is only one thing outside poison today to keep numbers under reasonable control which is the good old chopper.

Yes and the chopper gives access to foot hunters now.....if they are allowed to land in the park that is.

This screenshot was sopost to be included in my above post.
It's in reference to the first round of ungulate control in NLNP.

Ps can't upload the screenshot as it exceeds the forum limit for file type?

Must be 1/10th the size of a photo so beyond me..

I'll try this instead.

Thank you for taking the time to write to me and provide us with results, information, and observations from your hunting trip - this is really important and valuable information for us.





Deer

Chamois

Total animals

Seen



330

83

413

Shot



78

14

92



Other pests reported shot: 1 cat and 3 Canada geese



Sex ratio:

51% of deer shot were female (49% males)

21% of Chamois shot were female (79% male)

Originally Posted by hebe

I disagree with one aspect of your statement.
Hunters can be conservationists too. I work in biosecurity, have worked for DoC for a few years as well, and regularly volunteer trapping in the Northern Ruahines and Kawekas. To draw a line in the sand saying you’re a hunter not a conservationist ignores a lot of nuance around why people do the things they do. Some guys shoot whatever they see, others shoot bugger all. But the net effect is on the whole, positive for biodiversity. But only in the fact that a deer is dead.

But I may also be misinterpreting your statement as well.

Determining carrying capacity of an area requires informed data specific to local ecosystem type and maybe indeed by catchment. Figure out the numbers of deer currently in there the best way you can and then aim for having a lower density herd. @Gibo is right in saying that they need to be managed as a resource, but who pays and who says.

@hebe the fundamental difference in what we are saying is I was speaking in the most basic generalities and you used nuance! Perhaps a better way of looking at it is a modern affluent culture might see 'pest' animals destroying an ecosystem and be prepared to expend the time and effort into attempting to eradicate the damaging species to preserve the whole. By contrast others (for example people in desperate poverty trying to keep their family alive by hunting meat) have a huge vested interest in harvesting this meat in a long term sustainable way, or even letting the game numbers build up to provide plenty for the future. In many respects these two approaches are incompatible, which I think is why this whole discussion will always be difficult to resolve.

As an example I hand sowed 100,000 nikau seeds in a bush remnant gully about 15 or 20 years ago and had masses of palms up to about 1m high, now they are almost all gone due to the deer. Preserving long term access to venison in this gully is a very low priority for me. But at the same time a bloke on a lifestyle block down the road has allegedly been actively releasing fallow deer so he can hunt them, and has zero interest in preserving natural biodiversity. Can't keep everyone happy.

Originally Posted by tetawa

Foot hunters couldn't control deer 50- 80 years ago when there were real trained "guns' being paid to achieve who could and would live and survive under the harshest conditions. There is only one thing outside poison today to keep numbers under reasonable control which is the good old chopper.

there is one major difference....today the herds havent had the big block of time to build up or the big areas at back of nowhere to do it...we are so much more mobile these days...eg big station shepherds zip out back on side by side in hour at most...what used to be days ride on horse... places werent visited for months on end,now get "seen' on regular basis.
but 100% agree the chopper is the ultimate control tool......controlling the use of the tool for maximum benifit for all is the tricky bit.