Printable View
Sorry fellas, made a bit of a hash putting up the link, hopefully this is better.
News hub article claiming Sika in the Kawekas are destroying the forest. Numbers are four fold higher than they ideally should be.
CEO of F&B claims the forest’s collapse is imminent due to the deer.
http://https://www.newshub.co.nz/hom...ly-culled.html
Old footage from Back Ridge Biv area
They should take one of the presenters in there for a walk and see how many they trips over in 4 hours
Four fold higher than what they should be is a refreshingly better attitude than the exterminate exterminate attitude f and b usually have
so the forest survived say the 40's all the shooters overseas until now without collapsing? is this just f&b bullshit?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbine
Forest and Bird will always stir the pot. But the fact is in there the conversation needs to be had about how many is a reasonable number. The park is riddled with them and a lot of them are in shit condition. Shit lines and veg plots are as good of a method as youll find to establish density but theres still a big margin for error.
Sika werent in big numbers in there for a long time in the 50s and early 60s, but they outcompeted the reds over the years and now you find very very few reds in the park. They’re good at scratching a living from crap feed. Theres a bit of spin here for sure and I think in part this was a light beat up of Potaka but I dont see this conversation to be entirely negative.
The uni students that count the droppings are well versed in creative accounting
Writing a few numbers on a bit of paper saves them climbing up through that rocky branch infested 70 degree climb for two hours
So the pellet count data is corrupted with inaccuracy’s and fabrications
I have had a LOT of students/seasonal/part time doc workers tell me this
It’s Just human nature doing what it does
The Sika are like ants,they’re everywhere but they’re not keen to let you see them
DOC are in for a serious hair-cut so out come Twig & Tweet with an "End is Nigh" emotional piece. This is the most hunter friendly Govt we've ever had and I foresee many collaborative efforts with the likes of NZDA, Sika Foundation & DOC. Todd McClay is very receptive to us hunters and an experienced MP so no doubt will work closely with the newbie at DOC. I hope so anyway.
Twig&Tweet will get tits in tangle at drop of hat-closely allies with certain political specimens -nuff said. as for hairy arsed spotty herberts -well seen enough to leave me colder than a honeymooners breakfast.
That's a bit like saying all orchardists (is that what they are called) are dope smoking hippees, based on the ones I've talked to.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7mmsaum
I know someone who is a team lead on the monitoring at present. The present crew are earning their money.
The issue I see is the money is coming from Jobs for Nature, so has to be spent in a particular way.
I personally think results per dollar could be achieved better in other ways.
Hebe's comment above is correct. F and B aren't completely wrong, be we dont like hearing it from them.
F&B are probably doing hunters a favour about Sika. Most hunters would agree that they are too thin and that their habitat is depleted, wouldn't they? If raising this leads to a balanced outcome about management it must be a good thing surely?
Getting up on our hind legs and rejecting/disrespecting everyone that challenges our views wont do a thing for helping the sika or the forrest.
How can you argue with this:
‘New research says recreational hunting doesn't keep sika deer numbers down low enough to let native bush thrive in a forest park in Hawke's Bay.
The study says large parts of Kaweka Forest Park will be reduced to scrub if sika deer aren't dramatically culled’
Even Deuley junior agreed when he mentioned aerial culling. And how often are the Duelys and other hunting shows encouraging hunters to shoot more deer, they know there’s a massive issue out there they just don’t want to be seen to be supporting the total eradication message. But honestly in some high biodiversity value spots why shouldn’t we support that?
The most interesting point they made for me was that you you can’t have a thriving environment and enough deer to satisfy hunters. Maybe not the average once a year hunter, but the better hunters should be able to shoot a deer in a balanced environment and I for one prefer to see a bush environment with seedlings and regeneration.
Generally I think hunters have become a bit lazy and want higher densities so that they can alway have an encounter and hopefully get an animal. But there’s a tipping point and I think we’ve passed that.
Don’t discredit research, get out there and have a look yourself and then shoot some deer!
From a selfish perspective I would far sooner trudge down and up that shingle slide by the BR campsite once for a fat deer than 3 times for 3 skinny deer :)
Let’s go back there! I’ll trudge up and down the shingle slide as many times as I need to, to recover every deer you shoot. Or even better you dit strong grandson can!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
it is a shame some people are dumb enough to fall for such blatant propaganda.