Maybe need to start shooting everything we see in some areas

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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)

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

@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.

---

Fair enough, that makes more sense. Did misinterpret you after all.
No offence meant in the least

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

God knows I have tried. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dusty Fog

hmm,funny that,my place had miles of nikau with pigs and goats yet they survived the supposed onslaught well,and goats eat everything

---

That's just annoying!!! You hardly ever see nikau around this area, although there are a few around. A bit further north there are patches of dense nikau (eg Waipatiki Beach). I wonder if mine got hammered partly for their novelty value? I had some super rare Ceroxylon palms from seed collected in the Quindiuense Valley above Bogota, the deer killed them too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

That's just annoying!!! You hardly ever see nikau around this area, although there are a few around. A bit further north there are patches of dense nikau (eg Waipatiki Beach). I wonder if mine got hammered partly for their novelty value? I had some super rare Ceroxylon palms from seed collected in the Quindiuense Valley above Bogota, the deer killed them too.

---

Is your property quite dry? I wonder if they were looking for water.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tahr

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

God knows I have tried. :)

---

Yes you have, and how is that going

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

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.

---

Large areas that weren't home to deer 40-50 years have growing populations. Just in the area here which was once your old stamping ground there are animals in areas where none existed 20 years ago when I moved to King Country. With all the farmland being converted for carbon credits, more ideal habitat will be created, the mind boggles at what another 10-20 growth will create.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

I had some super rare Ceroxylon palms from seed collected in the Quindiuense Valley above Bogota, the deer killed them too.

---

So you're complaining that one non-native species killed another non-native species :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tahr

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

God knows I have tried. :)

---

I got 92 deer in DOC land last year which would be only shot 10% of the deer I’d seen.

Our local NZDA has been working in with DOC focusing on undulate control, our last trip in October we shot 53 deer(48 females) and 448 goats.
We did two trips like this last year but we could of done this at least once a month for the year.
If all the county NZDA and other shooting clubs work in together on problem areas and some government help with funding would be awesome.

Some of the DOC boundary farms and stations have hundreds of deer on them. When the numbers get up the helicopter comes in and they fill the game chiller. I don’t know what it’s like in other parts of the country doing this.

The chopper has a regular beat down where I’m working shoots over 100 in a morning to fill the truck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tikka

I got 92 deer in DOC land last year which would be only shot 10% of the deer I’d seen.

Our local NZDA has been working in with DOC focusing on undulate control, our last trip in October we shot 53 deer(48 females) and 448 goats.
We did two trips like this last year but we could of done this at least once a month for the year.
If all the county NZDA and other shooting clubs work in together on problem areas and some government help with funding would be awesome.

Some of the DOC boundary farms and stations have hundreds of deer on them. When the numbers get up the helicopter comes in and they fill the game chiller. I don’t know what it’s like in other parts of the country doing this.

---

That’s a lot. Do you or the local nzda have an outlet for some of it? I shoot the odd one and they go to a charity. When the numbers get up it’s quite a bit of work but worth while.

Choppers aren't shootin much here I heard as no market for the meat, yet they fly over my property daily

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetawa

Large areas that weren't home to deer 40-50 years have growing populations. Just in the area here which was once your old stamping ground there are animals in areas where none existed 20 years ago when I moved to King Country. With all the farmland being converted for carbon credits, more ideal habitat will be created, the mind boggles at what another 10-20 growth will create.

---

Yep...but if farmland is being converted to forest then the habitat is expanding along with carrying capacity, isn't it?


I don't doubt that there are plenty of places with too may deer across NZ, but IMO those on private land are principally a matter for those land owners ( off-site impacts excluded), and I'd take nothing F&B said about anything at face value. I do think however there is scope for hunters to collectively take DoC on on its resistance to improving access to PCL for all sorts of activities, including hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tahr

That’s a lot. Do you or the local nzda have an outlet for some of it? I shoot the odd one and they go to a charity. When the numbers get up it’s quite a bit of work but worth while.

---

For myself it normally a day to walk in and a day walking out, some places it’s two days to get into areas where the numbers are really high, so I just fill up with back steaks from 2 to 6 deer. Sometimes will take rumps, silverside and topside if I only get one animal. It is a waste giving the rest to the pigs and wasp but need to get the numbers down or the Government will kill everything. The pigs are no good as they have been eating all the deer and goat carcasses and taste rank. I give a lot of meat away to family, friends, neighbours and the boy at work.

With the NZDA we are flying into the back blocks of DOC and limited to how much we can bring out as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetawa

Large areas that weren't home to deer 40-50 years have growing populations. Just in the area here which was once your old stamping ground there are animals in areas where none existed 20 years ago when I moved to King Country. With all the farmland being converted for carbon credits, more ideal habitat will be created, the mind boggles at what another 10-20 growth will create.

---

amazing what many releases by safari farms does to boost a small resident population...there WERE NO fallow in the area 30 years ago.... and I personally saw video of them being released into poorly fenced block...fast forward 5 years and they were already popping up all over the show....
even good deer farmers get escapees.... thats folks who move them around and handle them regularly..not release into big area and leave them to it....
agree about the areas sold off for pine plantations....they big sanctuary...but still get more looked over than they would have years back.
we will see more of the big chopper culls....as to who ends up paying for them....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maxx

Yep...but if farmland is being converted to forest then the habitat is expanding along with carrying capacity, isn't it?


I don't doubt that there are plenty of places with too may deer across NZ, but IMO those on private land are principally a matter for those land owners ( off-site impacts excluded), and I'd take nothing F&B said about anything at face value. I do think however there is scope for hunters to collectively take DoC on on its resistance to improving access to PCL for all sorts of activities, including hunting.

---

They are a easier to control when necessary if the area is farmland than when the pines take over which creates good cover. Find the ones that have the last say at DOC have their agenda intrenched, there are still some good guys at the coal face but even those are diminishing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thatguy

There are thousands of hunters like myself, eager to help farmers bring down the animal numbers if we can only get access. Maybe I’m to thick to work it out but why is there private land with exploding numbers then? That’s a genuine question, by the way.

---

I think this will answer the question.I have a hunting block that borders doc land and tbh I want numbers high. I let a few bods on to hunt it but don't want it getting shot up so much as to it affects my hunting.I reckon everyone that has a hunting block has the same outlook, productive farms could be different though but almost every farm has serious family member or friend that will hunt it and want to keep numbers good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmate

I think this will answer the question.I have a hunting block that borders doc land and tbh I want numbers high. I let a few bods on to hunt it but don't want it getting shot up so much as to it affects my hunting.I reckon everyone that has a hunting block has the same outlook, productive farms could be different though but almost every farm has serious family member or friend that will hunt it and want to keep numbers good.

---

Makes sense. I’m just referring to any other farm that don’t want deer. Plenty of hunters to pick and choose from to help with the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmate

I think this will answer the question.I have a hunting block that borders doc land and tbh I want numbers high. I let a few bods on to hunt it but don't want it getting shot up so much as to it affects my hunting.I reckon everyone that has a hunting block has the same outlook, productive farms could be different though but almost every farm has serious family member or friend that will hunt it and want to keep numbers good.

---

This is exactly what the issue is. What you are saying is 100% reasonable and rational, but possibly totally incompatible with the guy down the road with a native plant restoration project going. How to reconcile these two goals is beyond me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thatguy

Makes sense. I’m just referring to any other farm that don’t want deer. Plenty of hunters to pick and choose from to help with the issue.

---

So maybe the guy farming down the road from @Yesmate does not want deer and gets you in to shoot them. But poor old Yesmate has been watching one great stag and letting him get just a few months older, then you find this animal on the neighbouring farm and shoot him, and all the other deer Yesmate wants to protect for his hunting. See where the conflict arises? It does not work on a farm to farm basis, only on a district-wide basis. I've mentioned here already my desire to be deer-free, but there is a guy down the road who is allegedly deliberately releasing fallow. How do we reconcile this?

Interesting thread. Lots of great opinions based on practical experience.
My opinion is that aerial shooting is the only answer. There are just too many deer for private hunters to deal with. We have some fantastic hunters in the country. But the shear size of NZ’s back country makes it , plus practical consideration like jobs, families and other commitments, near impossible to keep numbers down.
In terms of private land it isn’t the holy grail many dream of. Don’t get me wrong access to these places are gold. You get plenty of deer. But…here’s my experience for what it’s worth. I have access to a sheep and cattle station. It is over run with deer. Often mobs of 40-50 are seen. However they aren’t stupid. They bugger off the minute you accidentally spook a mob of sheep. If you do get on to them a couple of shots and they are back in the bush. Spotlighting is the same. See a dozen sets of eyes, shoot 2 and the rest are gone. The only way you will reduce numbers is through 1080 or aerial shooting. But there lies the issue. I spoke to the owner about it. He wants the deer gone but the expense of a chopper to basically search and destroy without the return of selling the deer is financially unviable. So the deer thrive. We shoot a few. Nothing changes.
Just my experiences. But multiply this by god knows how many farms (forgetting about public land) and there are significant issues.

Choppers and Petfood chillers for ground hunters.

Some highly prized trophy areas like the Otago and Rakaia herd need some level of management plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

This is exactly what the issue is. What you are saying is 100% reasonable and rational, but possibly totally incompatible with the guy down the road with a native plant restoration project going. How to reconcile these two goals is beyond me.




So maybe the guy farming down the road from @Yesmate does not want deer and gets you in to shoot them. But poor old Yesmate has been watching one great stag and letting him get just a few months older, then you find this animal on the neighbouring farm and shoot him, and all the other deer Yesmate wants to protect for his hunting. See where the conflict arises? It does not work on a farm to farm basis, only on a district-wide basis. I've mentioned here already my desire to be deer-free, but there is a guy down the road who is allegedly deliberately releasing fallow. How do we reconcile this?

---

yep its a niggly issue alright,i don't believe there is actually a solution for all.and as mentioned above they are transient buggers they just go where the sweetest food is and then clear off not to be seen again for a while,there's no chance of nailing a mob of them as they just split after a shot or 2.I totally think the first lockdown(in the roar)has pretty much caused this issue,numbers were already high but now they are off the charts.iv never seen wild deer mobbing up in 30-50 herds before until recently.think about it every single hind would have got it during that roar and I dunno about stag numbers that roughly get shot during a standard roar,20-30%?but they all got to live as well.

There is one single common block to the isssue of wild animal management throughout all this discussion. It is simply access and permissions. There is adequate technology and manpower available to use it once obtained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gilly

Interesting thread. Lots of great opinions based on practical experience.
My opinion is that aerial shooting is the only answer. There are just too many deer for private hunters to deal with. We have some fantastic hunters in the country. But the shear size of NZ’s back country makes it , plus practical consideration like jobs, families and other commitments, near impossible to keep numbers down.
In terms of private land it isn’t the holy grail many dream of. Don’t get me wrong access to these places are gold. You get plenty of deer. But…here’s my experience for what it’s worth. I have access to a sheep and cattle station. It is over run with deer. Often mobs of 40-50 are seen. However they aren’t stupid. They bugger off the minute you accidentally spook a mob of sheep. If you do get on to them a couple of shots and they are back in the bush. Spotlighting is the same. See a dozen sets of eyes, shoot 2 and the rest are gone. The only way you will reduce numbers is through 1080 or aerial shooting. But there lies the issue. I spoke to the owner about it. He wants the deer gone but the expense of a chopper to basically search and destroy without the return of selling the deer is financially unviable. So the deer thrive. We shoot a few. Nothing changes.
Just my experiences. But multiply this by god knows how many farms (forgetting about public land) and there are significant issues.

---

You are onto it.
Mate with a thermal sees dozens all over the place. Open up on them though, and you'll be lucky to get two-three of them. They are not silly.

Animals are driven by food. Pressure is a deterrent and it can be used to concentrate them for various management options. Access ( eg for shooters) will create pressure by ocking access to food and by creating a tenuous environment.
It's simple really; just need to remove vested interests and bureacrats and their job protections on public lands and agencies and create enforceable managed population limits on private lands. A long term national comittment to actual game management is the prerequisit.

Maybe I'm wrong but having read the link it sounded like deer were coming out of public land, rather than have a go at the farmers surrounding the public why not get in there at the source an shoot them?
The Ruahines are crawling with deer that are so hungry there coming out onto farm land, as has been said we the hunters need to start just shooting whatever we see even if to waste just get numbers under control.

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gilly

Interesting thread. Lots of great opinions based on practical experience.
My opinion is that aerial shooting is the only answer. There are just too many deer for private hunters to deal with. We have some fantastic hunters in the country. But the shear size of NZ’s back country makes it , plus practical consideration like jobs, families and other commitments, near impossible to keep numbers down.
In terms of private land it isn’t the holy grail many dream of. Don’t get me wrong access to these places are gold. You get plenty of deer. But…here’s my experience for what it’s worth. I have access to a sheep and cattle station. It is over run with deer. Often mobs of 40-50 are seen. However they aren’t stupid. They bugger off the minute you accidentally spook a mob of sheep. If you do get on to them a couple of shots and they are back in the bush. Spotlighting is the same. See a dozen sets of eyes, shoot 2 and the rest are gone. The only way you will reduce numbers is through 1080 or aerial shooting. But there lies the issue. I spoke to the owner about it. He wants the deer gone but the expense of a chopper to basically search and destroy without the return of selling the deer is financially unviable. So the deer thrive. We shoot a few. Nothing changes.
Just my experiences. But multiply this by god knows how many farms (forgetting about public land) and there are significant issues.

---

But how did that property that you hunt get to that point in the first place? Deer don't just explode overnight infact quite the contrary. Most of the time it is someone protecting them at some stage.
As for the owner wanting the deer gone but not being able to afford it. Well if you do the maths it doesn't take long to figure out roughly how much in savings they will make in regards to crop damage and hundreds of stock units worth of deer competing with farm animals for tucker they will save by removing some deer.
I do pest control professionally and I have yet to meet a landowner who was disappointed from spending money getting deer removed.

As for places like the Ruahines. Well the Battle for Our Birds has significantly reduced the numbers in 30000 odd hectares of the northern end. Throughout some of it the numbers now are rather low. With the pattern of an aerial drop approximately every two years for potentially a very long time, the numbers are always going to be low.
So you have the rest of the Ruahines. Throughout some of it the numbers are moderate and in other spots the numbers are far too high. But, when, not if, when the venison prices go back up they will get absolutely slaughtered. As it stood before the prices dropped some of the operators were getting 90% of the deer they saw at the start of the 6 month season. So no matter what at some point recreational hunters will lose out again.
But there are no fly zones in the Ruahines and I do agree with the likes of BRADS there, recreational hunters should be taking lead and removing as many hinds as they can.

You'll be surprised to know that sometimes the professional ground cullers are getting more than the choppers in some instances too in regards to price per head

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TLB

But how did that property that you hunt get to that point in the first place? Deer don't just explode overnight infact quite the contrary. Most of the time it is someone protecting them at some stage.
As for the owner wanting the deer gone but not being able to afford it. Well if you do the maths it doesn't take long to figure out roughly how much in savings they will make in regards to crop damage and hundreds of stock units worth of deer competing with farm animals for tucker they will save by removing some deer.
I do pest control professionally and I have yet to meet a landowner who was disappointed from spending money getting deer removed.

As for places like the Ruahines. Well the Battle for Our Birds has significantly reduced the numbers in 30000 odd hectares of the northern end. Throughout some of it the numbers now are rather low. With the pattern of an aerial drop approximately every two years for potentially a very long time, the numbers are always going to be low.
So you have the rest of the Ruahines. Throughout some of it the numbers are moderate and in other spots the numbers are far too high. But, when, not if, when the venison prices go back up they will get absolutely slaughtered. As it stood before the prices dropped some of the operators were getting 90% of the deer they saw at the start of the 6 month season. So no matter what at some point recreational hunters will lose out again.
But there are no fly zones in the Ruahines and I do agree with the likes of BRADS there, recreational hunters should be taking lead and removing as many hinds as they can.

You'll be surprised to know that sometimes the professional ground cullers are getting more than the choppers in some instances too in regards to price per head

---

I respect your views as a professional hunter. You know what you are talking about.
You’ve raised some good points here. From what I can gather the deer moved in from an adjoining station and huge private forestry that had a no shooting policy. As the tucker ran out the deer moved. Apparently it happened pretty quickly according to the owner.
In terms of the cost in terms of eating crops and grass. Yes huge. They have deer fenced a significant part of the property to keep deer out.

Lord knows I try to do the whole shoot every deer that moves however not all of us are that good!

well I NORMALLY shoot the first deer I see...then carry it home to my freezer...I call that hunting/harvesting.... wallabies and hares I will shoot and leave,but deer/chammy/pigs all get ride home for dinner at my place.....so far I havent seen the rampaging hordes of feral animals..needless to say but when I DO then I will change how I HUNT....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

well I NORMALLY shoot the first deer I see...then carry it home to my freezer...I call that hunting/harvesting.... wallabies and hares I will shoot and leave,but deer/chammy/pigs all get ride home for dinner at my place.....so far I havent seen the rampaging hordes of feral animals..needless to say but when I DO then I will change how I HUNT....

---

yeah mate, you'll be bringing home the first 10 deer you see:D

nope,but will be bringing home the best 10% of each one LOL....

Creating a live deer trapping Association or club (s)and doing Deer live trapping would be a good solution.

Creating some large , high fenced areas, with water available , so that the animal caught don't suffer of dehydration ( there could also be a bit of food for them )
Using trail cameras linked to the gsm net work so that members of an area are notified when a deer/pig/ goat is caught in the high fenced area.
Two or three guys go to the fence trap in the next few days and dispatch the animals and carry the meat home.( they can check water/ food and reset the trap)
Depending of the area requirements, nice stags can be let out for the coming roar for exemple, and hinds and fawn can be specially targeted.
Same thing with the pigs. Big male boar could be set free while pregnantfemale taken care of.

When two or three members of the club got one deer, the next lot of members from the club can go harvest the next catch .

With a bit of help from Doc that could be a viable system.
The only major problem I foresee would be jealous hunters coming upon the fenced area and cutting holes in the fence and sabotaging the concept.

I have been thinking for a while about it. It would be a good alternative to 1080 and at least not so much wate of good meat.
It would also be an alternative to getmeat for those who are not so physically fit and can't go too far for hunting and to get meet for their whanau.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Friwi

Creating a live deer trapping Association or club (s)and doing Deer live trapping would be a good solution.

Creating some large , high fenced areas, with water available , so that the animal caught don't suffer of dehydration ( there could also be a bit of food for them )
Using trail cameras linked to the gsm net work so that members of an area are notified when a deer/pig/ goat is caught in the high fenced area.
Two or three guys go to the fence trap in the next few days and dispatch the animals and carry the meat home.( they can check water/ food and reset the trap)
Depending of the area requirements, nice stags can be let out for the coming roar for exemple, and hinds and fawn can be specially targeted.
Same thing with the pigs. Big male boar could be set free while pregnantfemale taken care of.

When two or three members of the club got one deer, the next lot of members from the club can go harvest the next catch .

With a bit of help from Doc that could be a viable system.
The only major problem I foresee would be jealous hunters coming upon the fenced area and cutting holes in the fence and sabotaging the concept.

I have been thinking for a while about it. It would be a good alternative to 1080 and at least not so much wate of good meat.
It would also be an alternative to getmeat for those who are not so physically fit and can't go too far for hunting and to get meet for their whanau.

---

where would this club set the trap up?Private land?lease,fencing maintenance,organising costs will stop this,also I don't really think guys are gonna be interested in blowing away some animals in a paddock-the hunt is prob the most importantant part of hunting for most hunters.Doc land?don't think so.

The idea would be to do it on public land , in partnership with Doc.
Yes finance and motivated club members would have to be sorted.

I completely agree, it is not hunting, it does not bring the same excitement , it is there to regulate the overpopulated deer numbers and doing it with a reward which is carrying meat out and not letting it to waste.

It a third or fourth alternative to blanket poisoning, waro and lack of hunters to do the job.

deer fenced paddock ajoining forest block with jump in.or swinging gate..works the same way....its the permission to dispatch and remove then reset the trap bit that needs working out.