Thread: the OFF TOPIC to Stags shot 21 (discussion of wild animal management)

Originally Posted by Rees

Im not selling to general public though, im selling to Hunters in the Same forests, in which i seek a overall quality of hunting.

To me it seems easier to sell "you might be able to keep hunting in the future" rather than "antlers will be bigger" as a reason for a particular management strategy even to hunters - witness the "you can't eat bone/1080 or choppers will get them anyway" viewpoints. Of course "both" is a better sell than either individually, if wanting to influence hunter behaviour

i pay memebrship to the Deer assosc to Express their views to the Parliment in regard to what we are doing, an i hope they do it with our brest interest at heart an use the correct terminology ,

The hunter needs to work the same, PR work is huge, social media gets across more non hunting public than chit chat at the pub etc, so thats now up to the hunter to express it wisely.

in the forest though, the hunter is the conserver.

Demonstrate the tangible value of hunting to non-hunters by feeding them delicious ribs

Originally Posted by gimp

To me it seems easier to sell "you might be able to keep hunting in the future" rather than "antlers will be bigger" as a reason for a particular management strategy even to hunters - witness the "you can't eat bone/1080 or choppers will get them anyway" viewpoints. Of course "both" is a better sell than either individually, if wanting to influence hunter behaviour

Thanks for expressing your views mate, it can make arguements in future directed at the right people , a little easier to express positively by seeing different perspectives.

Originally Posted by gimp

My interests and motivations are more maintaining the social license to hunt and keep/manage a huntable population of game animals in NZ, while improving native biodiversity and habitat, rather than specifically growing more large trophy animals, but my belief is that the latter is a likely by-product of good management for the former.

Was wondering if this perspective would pop up. This thread has a lot of talk of game management but none of habitat management or conservation, one hind is worth 5 stags etc. As hunters we need to recognize that some areas just cant carry the amount of animals that live in them, and shooting everything IS a needed solution, by letting populations get to the levels that we are starting to see in some areas we are putting those areas at risk of a permanently weaker herd.

It doesn't matter how good an areas genetics are, if there isn't enough tucker to keep the animals in good breeding condition the trophy potential and health of the herd is going to suffer. Plain and simple, hungry deer don't grow big heads, they cant put on enough condition to be decent eating animals, which also means not enough condition to grow and raise healthy fawns, runty fawns end up being runty deer and the cycle continues.

Don't forget that hinds also carry genetics, and a young 2-5yr old stag with good genetics who is shot "before his prime" has still most likely passed his genes on, his genes don't get better as his antlers do, its almost like some people believe that stags only pass their genes on once when they are at peak antler growth and the hind they mate with has zero impact on the progeny!
Just another perspective to the debate but one that tends to be overlooked.
A healthy habitat breeds healthy deer and everyone wins, whether you are a conservationist, trophy hunter or meat hunter. The only people who lose out are the ones not willing to put in the time or legwork.

P.S a little pair of Bahco secateurs will mow through ribs with ease Gimp, also handy for snipping a branch to hang a leg on, cutting a window to harvest a heart without gutting, getting through supplejack or scrub quietly etc, good lightweight option instead of a hatchet.

This is what you need @Stocky, a Graf Boys carry frame https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgAhw2Uwhas
I made my one for under ten bucks in materials ( it is in the photo with the stag and rifle above). You are welcome to borrow it for a try, doesnt make the deer any lighter but lowers the COG so that sidling is easy and there is no fighting for balance

Originally Posted by gimp

Antler quality for trophy hunting is not a good sell to the general non-hunting public as a reason for game animal management. It's a non-starter. The words "Trophy Hunting" bring to mind all the worst connotations of hunting.

In the early days of our wild deer herds many well heeled hunters traveled here to hunt. As the trophy potential of herds decreased so to did interest in hunting here. Overseas hunters and their money saved the Tahr. Overseas fishers ensure a non deserved protection of trout over indigenous fauna. Improving the trophy value of herds improves their value and subsequent preservation IMO ( not withstanding all the sensible comments made around balancing population with habitat). Wolves anyone ?

Originally Posted by kbrebs

Was wondering if this perspective would pop up. This thread has a lot of talk of game management but none of habitat management or conservation, one hind is worth 5 stags etc. As hunters we need to recognize that some areas just cant carry the amount of animals that live in them, and shooting everything IS a needed solution, by letting populations get to the levels that we are starting to see in some areas we are putting those areas at risk of a permanently weaker herd.

It doesn't matter how good an areas genetics are, if there isn't enough tucker to keep the animals in good breeding condition the trophy potential and health of the herd is going to suffer. Plain and simple, hungry deer don't grow big heads, they cant put on enough condition to be decent eating animals, which also means not enough condition to grow and raise healthy fawns, runty fawns end up being runty deer and the cycle continues.

Don't forget that hinds also carry genetics, and a young 2-5yr old stag with good genetics who is shot "before his prime" has still most likely passed his genes on, his genes don't get better as his antlers do, its almost like some people believe that stags only pass their genes on once when they are at peak antler growth and the hind they mate with has zero impact on the progeny!
Just another perspective to the debate but one that tends to be overlooked.
A healthy habitat breeds healthy deer and everyone wins, whether you are a conservationist, trophy hunter or meat hunter. The only people who lose out are the ones not willing to put in the time or legwork.

P.S a little pair of Bahco secateurs will mow through ribs with ease Gimp, also handy for snipping a branch to hang a leg on, cutting a window to harvest a heart without gutting, getting through supplejack or scrub quietly etc, good lightweight option instead of a hatchet.

A young stag is very unlikely to breed unless the master stag has been shot. Young stags like young boars will hangout in the hope of getting a root but will be shoved aside when the girls are 'on'

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Overseas hunters and their money saved the Tahr.

Can you expand on this? Do you mean the moratorium on WARO in the 1980s? My understanding was that was largely due to the NZDA but I obviously wasn't around at the time so am willing to be corrected.

Tahr were never really in danger of eradication realistically (witness DOC efforts to remove tahr from outside the feral range for 30+ years, unsuccessfully and at great expense per animal once populations get low e.g. Waikite, Arawhata, Thompson Mountains, etc) but may have been reduced to a level where they were not a viable hunting resource indefinitely.

The economic aspect of hunting unfortunately isn't a winner in the legislative framework of managing wild animals in New Zealand, where economic aspects take 2nd tier position behind maintaining ecological integrity. WARO exists and is legally permitted as it is free management of wild animals, not due to economic benefits it generates.

This is a good listen for a social science perspective on understanding how non-hunters feel about various arguments for hunting, which is important for maintaining our social license to preserve viable huntable populations of game animals in New Zealand in the future. It's US-centric obviously but the general point will still hold.

https://www.themeateater.com/listen/...reg-blascovich

Up here on the east coast the problem is there is so much forestry that has no public access and and some have got no hind policy.
a guy a know had hundred hinds coming out in to his locked up calving paddocks last year, i talked to another guy couple weeks a go they counted 80 hinds and two piece of shit stags in there back paddocks.
I know of a farm that sold in the last 12months, they shot over 300 deer of it with a chopper (anything that moved fallow and reds)
The raukumara's is not far away from getting 1080 its a big block with no real public access and helicopter access is costly. Getting done for possums and deer. Doc have already had guys on foot culling deer in there and goats.
Also goats are another animal out of control up here the only difference is they are worth money dead and alive so that gets more people interested.

I'm guilty of taking shanks over tenderloins at times. Bloody good cut and bloody good your you as well.

And yes @gimp the trophy hunting word has been destroyed by the connotation given by anti hunters and used by many hunters as a insult. The thing is being a trophy hunter doesn't exclude you from taking meat it just means you are selective and don't just kill anything you see. Shot quite a few self prescribed meat hunters walk past hinds to shoot stags. I'd argue most trophy hunters in NZ as it the ones that leave stags etc are more aware that hind numbers need controlling etc. I see it often with groups of guys coming out and each will have a stag but no apparent hinds. Shit I hardly hear of anyone shooting hinds up Lewis.

I agree with your statement that we should be trying to preserve hunting into the future in a constructive Manner not "it's our right" manner like many kiwis have. They both tend to have the same actions required because realistically 1 person can carry out about a whole mature red hind if we are talking high utilisation of meat/minimal waste. This means that every trip someone takes a stag they don't take a hind. We need to be killing a significant portion of hinds to reduce populations if I remember right It was a huge portion around 30% or something I can't seem to find it now. Clearly we are not doing this as populations are growing and I'd argue a few are being limited by the environment which is a huge negative I'd guess for vegetation. So I just see it as if we are meat hunters and want to hunt for meat we should were possible be targetting hinds anyway as our duty to try keep populations at a level determined to be sustainable. Trophy hunters should really be making an effort to take hinds where possible to do the same thing. The result would be more stags having to actually compete for hinds meaning stronger genetics passed on.

Hopefully we get to a stage where we can have some actual science go into determining carrying capacity, an acknowledgement of hunting as an potential management tool, and A few select areas set up similar to Fiordland to allow areas of significance to be legally managed for hunt quality.

Just thinking out loud I wander if you made an area stags by a tag type system only but open for hinds whether it would work or hunter participation would drop to zero.

The management agency needs to investigate novel techniques to incentivise hunters to target more management-effective individuals, whether goats, nanny tahr, hinds, etc.

I estimate a forum member and I killed $700+ worth of goats at management cost incidentally in one day walking out from a block this week. Imagine the conservation economic benefits if all hunters were incentivised to do the same.

Originally Posted by kbrebs

Was wondering if this perspective would pop up. This thread has a lot of talk of game management but none of habitat management or conservation, one hind is worth 5 stags etc. As hunters we need to recognize that some areas just cant carry the amount of animals that live in them, and shooting everything IS a needed solution, by letting populations get to the levels that we are starting to see in some areas we are putting those areas at risk of a permanently weaker herd.

It doesn't matter how good an areas genetics are, if there isn't enough tucker to keep the animals in good breeding condition the trophy potential and health of the herd is going to suffer. Plain and simple, hungry deer don't grow big heads, they cant put on enough condition to be decent eating animals, which also means not enough condition to grow and raise healthy fawns, runty fawns end up being runty deer and the cycle continues.

Don't forget that hinds also carry genetics, and a young 2-5yr old stag with good genetics who is shot "before his prime" has still most likely passed his genes on, his genes don't get better as his antlers do, its almost like some people believe that stags only pass their genes on once when they are at peak antler growth and the hind they mate with has zero impact on the progeny!
Just another perspective to the debate but one that tends to be overlooked.
A healthy habitat breeds healthy deer and everyone wins, whether you are a conservationist, trophy hunter or meat hunter. The only people who lose out are the ones not willing to put in the time or legwork.

P.S a little pair of Bahco secateurs will mow through ribs with ease Gimp, also handy for snipping a branch to hang a leg on, cutting a window to harvest a heart without gutting, getting through supplejack or scrub quietly etc, good lightweight option instead of a hatchet.

I think it's kind of assumed the many mentions of controlling populations is for habitat management you can't manage for habitat without managing for population. The discussion just has more than one focus.

Coming from a registered Angus background that focuses on breeding for better females I completely understand females carry half the genes. You cannot however assess antler quality genes by looking at a hind so no judgement can be made.

I thought earlier I had eluded to a feed pinch at which too many animals means they all suffer nutritionally ie meaning less healthy deer.

I don't agree with shooting everything even in high population areas. I think due to the fact that high pay a dividend of the equivalent population control as 5 stags and they have less effect on hunt quality for those that are looking for mature stags it makes far more sense to target hinds specifically leading to more competition between stags improving genes that carry on.

So in short I agree with all your points and thought they had been eluded to already earlier. I just disagree that targetting everything is a good way to do it as why kill 20 stags when you could much more easily just kill 4 extra hinds for the same population effect with less effect on hunt quality.