Thread: Tahr cull doc betrayal

Originally Posted by Tahr

I thought Gimp had already answered this pretty well: Politics, lack of funding for control/monitoring, harvest (rec/commercial) lower than predicted, population increase rate greater than predicted, population initially higher than estimated, high numbers on pastoral land dispersing to public land, take your pick of any/all of the above maybe.

Yes, Thanks @Tahr. I can appreciate that these factors are things that can contributed to the current numbers not being in line with what they should be, but my point is (and I am assuming this as I have not read the tahr control pan) within the management plan it would have outlined how animal numbers would be monitored and controlled and what this would cost (probably on an annual basis). If it didn't it is not much of a plan. For the numbers to have become 3.5x what the plan requires at some stage (in the last 25 years) it has not been noticed that the process has fallen over. Or perhaps some of the groups involved have not really cared.
If it was because of lack of monitoring then why? Who is supposed to be monitoring the numbers and how often?
If it was lack of control why? How are they controlled and by who?
If it was no budget why? Does it need to be reassessed to meet the goal?
For it to get to this stage I would suggest the management plan has been more of a wish list than an implemented plan.