Bushwalkers and NSW hunting accidents

[geraldolikesbananas]

Hi there,

Does anyone know how many bushwalkers have been hit and/or fatally wounded by errant fire following the legalisation of licensed hunting in a number of NSW state forests?

Cheers,

Geraldo.

[sharpstones]

Do you think all hunters are a bunch of dim wits not knowing what they're doing with their rifles?

Don't worry, if something did happen the media hounds would have definitely told you by now.

[Gadgetgeek]

I don't have stats, however I know that in general incidents like this are quite rare. both hunters and animals stay away from more heavily walked areas, so that cuts down on the interaction, Even if someone was walking off track, the typical hikers colors would make identification easier. If you are concerned, be sure to wear colors that are easily identifiable at a distance, instead of khaki, even a bright pack cover, and a brightly colored hat will help identify you.

[Xplora]

If someone had been shot then we would have heard about it and the program would have been stopped. Sadly it is more likely hunters will shoot each other and this occurs too often now with or without their orange hat and by hunters who are supposed to be the best at what they do. One in NZ was accredited to train others and also advised Police. He was regarded as one of the most experienced hunters in the country. The problem seems to arise in thicker scrub when the target is not identified properly. This is one of the main rules of hunting or shooting. Nothing has occurred in NSW to date that I am aware of i.e. a hiker being shot or even another hunter in the parks or state forest since the program started. It happens in the USA more often but there are other reasons for that. It is of course the USA and there is far less regulation with hunting. I still laugh every time I see a deer hunter wearing green cammo. Deer are colourblind. I guess it is not cool to wear day glow in the bush.

[RonK]

Do you think all hunters are a bunch of dim wits not knowing what they're doing with their rifles?

It only takes one dim wit to cause an incident, like the dim wit who shot and killed a woman tramper he thought was a deer while I was in NZ a few years ago.

I've had shots fired towards me in the bush, and heard the bullets rattling through the trees over my head, so don't tell me incidents can't happen.

[Gadgetgeek]

They most certainly can. its all a matter of how close people are to each other, and weather or not someone is aware of the likely hood of others being in the area. I know people who have heard bullets impact near them, who later determined the shooter was several Km away, no concept that their shots were traveling that far. Not a good situation, not malicious, but physics doesn't much care.

Not being familiar with hunting regs here, would it be a simple matter of not bushwalking during the hunting season, or is it a year round possibility?

[GPSGuided]

I know people who have heard bullets impact near them, who later determined the shooter was several Km away, no concept that their shots were traveling that far. Not a good situation, not malicious, but physics doesn't much care.

I'd be surprised if those shots were fired in the course of a legitimate hunt. With an optical sight, how can the shot stray that far unless it was shot into the air or without aim. Even if the shot missed the target, it's more than likely there's ground/tree and other natural objects behind the intended target. So I'm a bit sceptical unless the shooter was poorly behaving.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Gadgetgeek]

lots of factors involved including flat ground, low angle ricochet, among others. It turned out to have been a target practice session. ironic...

[GPSGuided]

Sounds about right, so called out of control 'target practice'.

[Gadgetgeek]

Lets just say that when word got around as to who heard the shots, and the response that he might lob a few back, a whole lot of folks started to pay a lot more attention.

[sharpstones]

It only takes one dim wit to cause an incident, like the dim wit who shot and killed a woman tramper he thought was a deer while I was in NZ a few years ago.

I've had shots fired towards me in the bush, and heard the bullets rattling through the trees over my head, so don't tell me incidents can't happen.

You did notice I did not imply that it cannot happen.

I have a feeling that people have an instantaneous and erroneous belief that as soon as hunters have access to somewhere they formerly did not that accidents are guaranteed to take place.

You heard bullets ratting through the trees but inexperience tells you it was close even though it probably wasn't. Go to war and you soon pass through a desensitisation thus entailing that the things that you once thought were near misses soon become distant and then you soon realise when it comes *really* close.

This is not to say that any bullet flying in your direction is alright - absolutely not and hunters should be 100% confident of their targets before even inserting their fingers into the trigger. From my understanding you also want an adequate backstop especially if you are doing any target practice (which I would venture to say takes place at a dedicated range most of the time).

My point is that people like to hold that all hunters will be and are a problem. Pick-up a hunting magazine and they themselves vehemently denounce the irresponsible hunters (which are always are a minority) that are out there, eg. I read an instance where some hunters left part of a kill in an exposed location and the author clearly stated that they should have disposed of it properly. These articles are also to a closed audience so it is clearly not an effective way to promote a positive picture of their pursuit.

I'm not a hunter, and I don't care for hunting - I just cannot stand the "nanny nature" to the affect that people become perverted in their judgements.

[jacko]

There are a lot of dimwits with rifles that aren't hunters.

[jacko]

And that is the bottom line. Below average IQ with lethal weapons.

[Xplora]

One of the best contributors to this site is a hunter and he gives a good balance to that side of outdoor adventure. Hunting does not appeal to me in the same way but I shoot and own guns. I was taught how to do so the military way and not by reading a booklet. I was trained to shoot people but even then with the concern of where my bullet would go if I missed. This so called 'minority' is growing in number and I see it regularly. Our local Police also have seen a significant increasing trend in bad behaviour with guns. This is not to be attributed to the hunting fraternity directly however it is not difficult to obtain a gun and game licence and a range day once a year does not provide any great instruction to those who are of the mind to do the wrong thing. Being able to answer questions on a paper does not make you gun safe. I think there is legitimate concern for the type of person who is able to obtain a licence and shoot on public land but as I said earlier it is not just the reckless who make mistakes. Hunters have been allowed to shoot in some areas of public land in Victoria for some time and no walker has been shot as yet. They have shot each other though. Relating how close a bullet came to you is also quite subjective. On a battlefield you are the intended target but in any other civil place and for the average person if you hear it go past then it is too close. I have also shot in NSW National parks but this has been part of feral animal control and the park was closed. The hunters will say they are doing a good job of feral animal control by being allowed in the NP. This is needed but the numbers do not reflect any real control. It will be a question that goes around in circles and a debate that will rage on depending on which side of the fence you sit. It is also a topic that will get lots of comment but effect little change in opinion and usually degrades to base insults.

[RonK]

It only takes one dim wit to cause an incident, like the dim wit who shot and killed a woman tramper he thought was a deer while I was in NZ a few years ago.

I've had shots fired towards me in the bush, and heard the bullets rattling through the trees over my head, so don't tell me incidents can't happen.

You did notice I did not imply that it cannot happen.

I have a feeling that people have an instantaneous and erroneous belief that as soon as hunters have access to somewhere they formerly did not that accidents are guaranteed to take place.

You heard bullets ratting through the trees but inexperience tells you it was close even though it probably wasn't. Go to war and you soon pass through a desensitisation thus entailing that the things that you once thought were near misses soon become distant and then you soon realise when it comes *really* close.

This is not to say that any bullet flying in your direction is alright - absolutely not and hunters should be 100% confident of their targets before even inserting their fingers into the trigger. From my understanding you also want an adequate backstop especially if you are doing any target practice (which I would venture to say takes place at a dedicated range most of the time).

My point is that people like to hold that all hunters will be and are a problem. Pick-up a hunting magazine and they themselves vehemently denounce the irresponsible hunters (which are always are a minority) that are out there, eg. I read an instance where some hunters left part of a kill in an exposed location and the author clearly stated that they should have disposed of it properly. These articles are also to a closed audience so it is clearly not an effective way to promote a positive picture of their pursuit.

I'm not a hunter, and I don't care for hunting - I just cannot stand the "nanny nature" to the affect that people become perverted in their judgements.

The only person here making a judgement is you.
The OP asked a quite reasonable question, no doubt out of a quite legitimate concern. He did not imply or infer anything about hunters. Your ranting responses are quite over the top.

Oh, and it's not very smart to make assumptions about members battlefield experiences. You simply have no idea what others have experienced.

And quoting from hunting magazines is laughable. But since you say you are not a hunter I'm left wondering why you read hunting magazines. And I'm left wondering just what is your agenda.

Perhaps a more appropriate response would have been to post the actual statistics - as the OP requested.

[flyfisher]

Does anyone know how many bushwalkers have been hit and/or fatally wounded by errant fire following the legalisation of licensed hunting in a number of NSW state forests?

Quite possibly none. Hopefully this is not a question to make an imaginary problem look likely.

FF

[Gadgetgeek]

Just like any other activity, there are things you can do to be safer, and things that are going to be more risky. Now as far as I know NSW doesn't have as much of a problem with grow-ops in public land like they do in some places in the US, where someone off-track might inadvertently become a target. In those cases, sticking to trails and acting like a hiker is a good way to stay safe, creeping through the woods like a survivalist, or a rival gang member, gonna earn you a different response. Wearing visible clothing, and staying away from areas likely to have hunters is a good plan in general, I don't like tempting fate any more than anyone else. But lets be honest, you could stumble across anything while off track, and someone may not want you to get back to civilization. not a likely occurrence, but not impossible. I think one could reasonably expect to stay pretty safe without much worry, with a little due care and caution.

[GPSGuided]

Here in NSW, must avoid in accidentally walking into a marijuana plantation, dramatically increasing one's chance of being shot and vanish from this society of ours.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Travis22]

I still laugh every time I see a deer hunter wearing green cammo. Deer are colourblind. I guess it is not cool to wear day glow in the bush.

Sure one might argue that back in the day the blokes took plenty of deer and world class trophies wearing jeans and flannies without needing cammo but back then the hunting pressure was also a lot lower.

However the argument that deer are colourblind thus wearing cammo is a joke is a bit of a joke imo. Deer, Sambar deer especially are incredibly cunning animals and they pay attention to everything around them including the noises and alarm call's from the birds and animals all around them, you need to evade the eyes of not just the deer while deer stalking.
While the colour isnt as important to evading deer the pattern is very important, wearing appropriate cammo for the local area is just one more thing to consider if your serious about deer stalking.
UV colour is another factor to consider when deer stalking. Deer have good vision in the short wavelengths where colour brighteners and uv dyes used in a lot of clothing and they pickup on the reflected light from everything, our skin especially so the more covered up one is the better, choosing equipment and clothing with this in mind is all apart of it.

Wearing cammo when one isnt hunting, now that is funny.

Travis.

[Xplora]

Travis - I walk around my property almost every day not wearing cammo and come across these very cunning creatures regularly. Sometimes we are right on top of them before they startle. Other times we could have taken a long breath and sight a good shot. In NZ they wear orange cammo so the other hunters can see them but even then it is not enough. Deer also have very poor eyesight at a distance, much like horses. The can make out shapes but it is more about movement. Often they will run on movement and then stop and turn to see if the predator is chasing. This is the time a good hunter will ready for the shot. I have stalked deer just for fun and it surprised me how long I could keep them close. One time it was for about half an hour and after that I decided to honk and stamp my feet. It was a big buck and he did the same thing back. He was about 100m away. Wearing cammo that hides you from other hunters is in my opinion asking for trouble and that is why I laugh. I have also seen many wearing the Ridgeline polarfleece gear on hot days. I suppose you need to dress like the sport to be a part of it. Even bushwalkers do that. Deer rely on scent and hearing more than eyesight. What you say though about UV light is true so wearing reflective clothing is probably not the best thing if you are hunting and apparently they can see blue well but not green or red. Hunting pressure on deer has had absolutely NO IMPACT in most areas. Numbers are increasing, in particular Sambar, to the point any mug with a gun can score one. This again is part of the problem. I have been talking about this with Sambar356 and quite possibly the increase in bad behaviour with guns is because it has become so easy. Doug recalls stalking for days just to see a deer and now he can see 60 in a weekend. If numbers were controlled and it became hard again all those bogans giving the sport a bad name would find it too hard and give up.
We see deer grazing alongside the cattle and then someone comes along and shoots it from the road, lops off the head or the hind quarters and leaves the rest for the wild dogs. I recently came across someone hunting deer in a prohibited area of the ANP. He said he was not aware but needless to say he should have been. It was an area frequented by bushwalkers. When I saw him he was coming out of the track an onto a public road with a loaded rifle. Another offence and he told me he had been hunting deer for 15 years and was a member of the ADA. I must admit he was very polite and even put his rifle down as we talked. That was a sign of respect as it could intimidate some people. I don't mind having a good discussion about these matters as long as it stays polite and respectful.

[michael_p]

Hi there,

Does anyone know how many bushwalkers have been hit and/or fatally wounded by errant fire following the legalisation of licensed hunting in a number of NSW state forests?

Cheers,

Geraldo.

Weird username, one post and controversial subject. I'd say we are being TROLLED.

[GPSGuided]

What's the troll's objective? Anything damaging yet?

[Travis22]

Deer behave very differently in farm settings and on farm fringes where hunting pressure is limited. I completely agree Sambar deer are almost tame if allowed to feed undisturbed on farmland and in plantations. This is completely different to their behavior in area's of high pressure.

As you mention scent is the be all and end all to getting close to Sambar, sight and sound is secondary to scent but again the big stag's dont get big by being silly and their evasion techniques are unbelievably good when they need them to be.

Again im not sure what you mean by hunting pressure deer has no impact, are you referring to their numbers or their behavior? Absolutely their numbers are exploding afterall the Vic high country is the perfect environment for them and they are extremely good at evading us humans. As for their behavior, i would suggest otherwise. Deer in area's of heavy hound hunting, v's remote limited access areas vs easy to access area and deer on farmland with little to no hunting pressure all react differently to people. Even in the ALP (where i would stalk) in the same area's once the gates are seasonally closed and the hunting pressure reduces the same animals behavior changes in a short period of time.

My experience and interactions with other hunters would also suggest that taking a sambar deer is still nowhere near as easy as you suggest and i honestly cannot imagine a day when they will be that easy to stalk. Most new deer stalkers can spend a year to years trying to learn these animals habits and signs and taking one is never a given. Again, im talking about these animals located in area's of public land where they can be stalked not on private property.

Sambar358 (Doug) is about as good as it gets and of course someone as skilled as himself can head straight out into their habitat today and locate them in high numbers but the average joe is currently still where Doug once was and that is mostly stalking for days to see one or none. Im sure hunters like Doug could probably successfully take Sambar deer wearing the brighest most highly reflecting clothing available but again for the majority we need every possible advantage we can muster to even get a glimpse of the mighty ghosts of the high country and more often then not that is still not enough.

The only way any mug with a firearm is going to successful shoot a Sambar deer easily is with a spotlight or poaching on private properly where hunting pressure is low.

Again i stand by my original post re: cammo and id like to think someone as experienced as Doug wouldnt pick my post apart too much but again im an absolute amateur by comparison.

Travis.

[flyfisher]

Yes, probably a troll, seems like the O P was just to get an argument going.

Often works.

FF

[Nuts]

I like cammo and wish more did, realtree is awesome

[GPSGuided]

Until it's a flame war that gets personal with people spitting the dummy, it's all good discussion.

[Xplora]

Yes, probably a troll, seems like the O P was just to get an argument going.

Often works.

FF

I tend to agree. I am not arguing with Travis. I do tend to agree with many things he says. It is hard to write it all down and then have someone else interpret what you have said. The fact that there are so many deer around encourages the lazy to do bad things. I have great respect for Doug and his ability but even he admits deer are easier to find. Even a mug like me can stalk a deer. Our deer are in forest and the hunting pressure is low so they may behave differently. I am also happy to differ in my opinion to others. I would much rather see a hunter in orange cammo than green. Life is important to me.

[sharpstones]

The only person here making a judgement is you.

Yes I know, I have a bad habit of doing that.
However as 2-3 other people have pointed out, what the OP was doing cannot be regarded with 100% innocence; unless clarification is to eventuate.

He did not imply or infer anything about hunters.

I find that hard to believe - IMO of course. And yes I was over the top but the conjecture that the OP has fed out was also "quite over the top too". You will see me explain that further below.

Oh, and it's not very smart to make assumptions about members battlefield experiences. You simply have no idea what others have experienced.

Of course - however I found the inferences made by Xplora to be quite similar -

Relating how close a bullet came to you is also quite subjective. On a battlefield you are the intended target but in any other civil place and for the average person if you hear it go past then it is too close.

But since you say you are not a hunter I'm left wondering why you read hunting magazines.

Funningly enough I found a trampled copy on the road just near the Horsley Park Gun Store. I thought it would be an interesting read and it was indeed helpful in gaining some insight.

And I'm left wondering just what is your agenda.

As stated at the end of my rant.
To clarify on my point - it seems (and it is the knee-jerk response I have witnessed when I've discussed this topic with others) that people become fearful as soon as they hear that "hunting" is/was allowed in National Parks. As others have mentioned in this thread, it is clear that the chances are slim that an accident will happen. I would be more concerned about being run over by some tourist bus but you don't see me creating a thread implying ...erm... inquiring (that) / (about the) fatalities [that] occur on the outskirts of NPs.

If the OP is genuinely interested on the ground of their own personal research they would have said "Does anyone know if any bushwalkers have been hit and/or fatally" rather than the implication of "Does anyone know how many bushwalkers have been hit and/or fatally"

Perhaps a more appropriate response would have been to post the actual statistics - as the OP requested.

Absolutely - good luck in your research RonK!

[Xplora]

I think the question has been answered and good on Sharpstones for your honest contributions and self revelation. Personally I think the topic should be deleted. Geraldo could have found out all the stats without asking here.

[Gadgetgeek]

I think it should be left as a testament to the overwhelming reasonableness of the crew here. No fun for trolls when everyone takes a measured response to a topic.