Hunting in some NSW National Parks

[wearthefoxhat]

Hi Tony,

You trust him/her the same way you trust an on comming vehicle travelling towards you at 100 ks an hour. you trust that they know what they are doing like we all do.

Hi wearthefoxhat,

So I have no way of knowing if I am going to be safe in the vicinity of the hunter.

And hunting firearm injuries and deaths are legitimate because we could be in a car accident.

Tony

Its more about what we percieve as a major risk. The risk being attached to hunting in NP's has been grossly exagerated and usefull to the anti hunting lobby who probably propagated it in the first place...it has turned out to be baseless when you consider the excellent record rec hunting so far..

tell me what are you afraid of the most... walking in a National Park or driving on a highway at 100 Kms?

[wildwalks]

That is Approximately 40,000 deer as estimated by the Australian Deer Association - who provide no rational for their estimate. - and is greatly different from the actual numbers shot in NSW SF.
http://www.environment.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/233129/Submission_8_-_Australian_Deer_Association.pdf

The Deer are now "protected" in Vic as game animals because of the pressure of hunting groups.
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2012/06/06/491691_business-news.html

And in parks where we see behaviour like taking dogs into national parks
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/12/1047431095311.html

The number of of feral animals removed is not the point - it is how is the impact of the feral population is reduced. The fact that recreational hunting is allowed means that there is a lobby group who applies pressure to maintain a population of animals to make the sport viable. There should be no desire to maintain feral animal populations in any National Park.

The model in Vic may not have related in the death of a person (yet - although too many hunters die in other areas in Australia).
It has been a complete failure environmentally.
The decision on the removal of feral animals should be based on research and not compromised by any sport. What happens in Vic is also different then what is legal in NSW.

How is the idea of hunting a deer with a bow and arrow possibly humane or defensible as part of a scientific culling program?
The govt must now turn around and admit this is some kind of April fouls day joke - then we can all have a good laugh and move on.

Matt

[Turfa]

"Unfortunately you are still failing to understand that the general public does not see hunters as a group as "highly skilled" as per my previous comments regarding the lax requirements for obtaining an R licence. "

You may have missed my previous post to turfa. I have already stated that the R license process needs a review/upgrade..


"Turfa,,,Yes the training process needs an overhaul IMO. Although we teach and test for proficiency and ethical killing I understand not every club does this. There should be an across the board mandatory training package IMO."

cheers

We do agree on this 100%...however this does not change the fact that a mandatory training & assessment process is not in place at the moment & there are absolutely no controls over the skills of the very people who are about to be permitted to shoot in National Parks. If you & other sensible, responsible hunters, (who are obviously happy to say these things personally) were to publicly question the competence of the Game Council & their licencing system & lobbied for tighter controls, you may well get better community acceptance of your position.

In addition, you are being represented by a body that is clearly not aligned with your stated goals of using "conservation hunters" to control feral animals on public land. The very fact that the Game Council has designated 'deer seasons' for particular species and applies bag limits shows that they are mostly interested in preserving ferals to provide an ongoing supply of game animals for hunters, not in eliminating feral animals from public land. (and these restrictions apply on private land too !!!)

If deer are feral animals & cause damage to our native habitats, why is is not legal to kill them at any time and in any number..... surely the ultimate goal of 'conservation hunting' is the elimination of feral species.... or is it ??????

Until you can resolve these issues your arguments will have little credibility in the eyes of most people.

[wearthefoxhat]

Hi Turfa

"there are absolutely no controls over the skills of the very people who are about to be permitted to shoot in National Parks."

This not true. Many (not all though) have a proficiency test for this. The word "absolutely" is not correct.

Deer seasons are there because it gives deer a chance to raise and wean their young. Often fawns lie in the long grass and you have no idea if a doe has a fawn. So from a humane point of view I support this. I don't want to shoot a doe and have its fawn starve to death..

"If deer are feral animals " They are not. they are classified as game animals in NSW and come with different rules attached..

"Until you can resolve these issues your arguments will have little credibility in the eyes of most people."

Interestingly I don't meet many people who oppose hunting in NP's. They ask alot of questions but seem ok with it..

[wearthefoxhat]

WW..I have some reading to do I see lol.

I have run out of time now but look forward to it later.

cheers

[wildwalks]

"If deer are feral animals " They are not. they are classified as game animals in NSW and come with different rules attached..

And until this hunting in National Parks legislation was passed Deer where seen as feral in National Park settings. Now they are Game - this is clearly an abuse of the NP system for the gain for hunters.

Matt

[wildwalks]

This not true. Many (not all though) have a proficiency test for this. The word "absolutely" is not correct.

Then how about this

"There are absolutely no legal requirements for any recreational hunter to have ever shot a gun before going on their first solo hunting either on a farm, in a NSW State Forest or soon into a NSW National Park."

I don't understand why hunters are outraged by this? Why must we wait for a non-hunter to die in NSW before this law is changed?

Matt

[Turfa]

Hi Turfa

Deer seasons are there because it gives deer a chance to raise and wean their young. Often fawns lie in the long grass and you have no idea if a doe has a fawn. So from a humane point of view I support this. I don't want to shoot a doe and have its fawn starve to death..

"If deer are feral animals " They are not. they are classified as game animals in NSW and come with different rules attached..

OK, so the dear seasons are for humane reasons......so why is it that Hog, Fallow, Wapiti & Red deer have seasons but Chital, Sambar & Rusa do not & it is OK to shoot them at any time of year ? Seems a bit rough on the Chital, Sambar & Rusa fawns !! Sure, these species do not have a specific breeding season, but then if you want to run your 'humane' argument then you should not be shooting them at any time of year.

Ah yes, the Game Animal designation...this one thing in itself shows the true purpose of the Game Council & 'conservation hunting' . By designating them as game animals you are specifically saying that you wish to preserve their numbers to provide ongoing sport to recreational hunters.

This is why the Game Council & much of the 'conservation hunting' argument appears so self serving.

[wearthefoxhat]

"OK, so the dear seasons are for humane reasons......so why is it that Hog, Fallow, Wapiti & Red deer have seasons but Chital, Sambar & Rusa do not "

The first four you mentioned have a specific breeding period and gestation time... meaning they all breed and birth within a general time frame every year...

Chital, Sambar and Rusa are Asiatic deer and may not have a specific breeding time. Or in other words they can breed all year. So yes perhaps they do maybe get the raw end of the deal.

[wearthefoxhat]

"
"There are absolutely no legal requirements for any recreational hunter to have ever shot a gun before going on their first solo hunting either on a farm, in a NSW State Forest or soon into a NSW National Park."


This is right and I would be happy to see this changed for obvious resons. Truthfully though I can't imagine anyone going hunting without target practice first.

[wearthefoxhat]

"If deer are feral animals " They are not. they are classified as game animals in NSW and come with different rules attached..

And until this hunting in National Parks legislation was passed Deer where seen as feral in National Park settings. Now they are Game - this is clearly an abuse of the NP system for the gain for hunters.

Matt

Are you sure. I don't think this is right...can you show me where this is the case?

[wearthefoxhat]

That is Approximately 40,000 deer as estimated by the Australian Deer Association - who provide no rational for their estimate. - and is greatly different from the actual numbers shot in NSW SF.
http://www.environment.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/233129/Submission_8_-_Australian_Deer_Association.pdf

The Deer are now "protected" in Vic as game animals because of the pressure of hunting groups.
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2012/06/06/491691_business-news.html

And in parks where we see behaviour like taking dogs into national parks
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/12/1047431095311.html

The number of of feral animals removed is not the point - it is how is the impact of the feral population is reduced. The fact that recreational hunting is allowed means that there is a lobby group who applies pressure to maintain a population of animals to make the sport viable. There should be no desire to maintain feral animal populations in any National Park.

The model in Vic may not have related in the death of a person (yet - although too many hunters die in other areas in Australia).
It has been a complete failure environmentally.
The decision on the removal of feral animals should be based on research and not compromised by any sport. What happens in Vic is also different then what is legal in NSW.

How is the idea of hunting a deer with a bow and arrow possibly humane or defensible as part of a scientific culling program?
The govt must now turn around and admit this is some kind of April fouls day joke - then we can all have a good laugh and move on.

Matt

On your first point... In my experience there isn't alot of deer in the State Forests NSW...State Forests IMO usually do it a bit tough for feed for much of the year..this may explain why deer killed in NSW SP was a little under half that of Vic.

Secondly you said..."The Deer are now "protected" in Vic as game animals because of the pressure of hunting groups." Are you saying they have been reclassified as a game animal recently?
According to the article a farmer in Vic has to have a license to cull deer on his own property...Is this true? or another media beat up. because if it is they should change that to the way we do it here in NSW. A property owner, manager or employee can cull deer 12 months of the year..

thirdly....I am glad you posted that... It shows how hunters who hunt legally don't tolerate poaching... looks like a good result and backs some of my previous comments about how legal hunters are active in the fight against poachers..

"
"The decision on the removal of feral animals should be based on research and not compromised by any sport."

it has been proven effective and aknowledged by NP managers SA and Vic. In fact it has become essential in those areas. These are guys on the front line, top of the game. They have a different opinion to you. Perhaps you could take the debate up with them.

"How is the idea of hunting a deer with a bow and arrow possibly humane or defensible as part of a scientific culling program?"

Would you prefer I used poison? a bit dangerous for my family to be eating that though hey!

[Turfa]

...Is this true? or another media beat up. because if it is they should change that to the way we do it here in NSW. A property owner, manager or employee can cull deer 12 months of the year..

yes, they can.... & rightly so, but once again this shows the hypocrisy of the Game Council & the 'conservation hunting' argument regarding game species.

If it is appropriate for farmers to cull deer on their properties in any quantity, at any time of year, why do deer in state forests & NP's need to be "managed" by bag limits & restricted seasons, if not for the purpose of providing a continuing supply of target animals. It also invalidates your previous position regarding deer seasons being for the "humane" purpose of preventing orphaned young. If this is so important, why are farmers exempt ?

Please explain to me how setting a bag limit on deer contributes to the stated goal of reducing invasive species on public lands ?

Also, explain to me why I hear so many hunters complaining that an area has been "shot out"........ surely that is a good thing if you are truly interested in conservation of our public lands.... .... but of course from the hunters perspective is is not. However, it does quite clearly show that hunters have a desire to maintain stocks of invasive species in state forests & national parks.....

Please explain to me how that is the right attitude to have towards our national parks ?

[photohiker]

tell me what are you afraid of the most... walking in a National Park or driving on a highway at 100 Kms?

Why is this even suggested as a comparison?

Before the hunters pushed their way into NP's there was zero risk of being shot while bushwalking, now the risk while bushwalking has increased enormously, while the driving risk has stayed exactly the same.

tell me what are you afraid of the most... Jumping out of a plane without a parachute or lying on the train track while a train approaches?

[wearthefoxhat]

tell me what are you afraid of the most... walking in a National Park or driving on a highway at 100 Kms?

Why is this even suggested as a comparison?

Before the hunters pushed their way into NP's there was zero risk of being shot while bushwalking, now the risk while bushwalking has increased enormously, while the driving risk has stayed exactly the same.

tell me what are you afraid of the most... Jumping out of a plane without a parachute or lying on the train track while a train approaches?

What has your enormous risk increased to ?

[maddog]

Given the ballooning costs of recreational hunters to the taxpayer of NSW (now $6,300,000 +), the cost-benefit of the Game Council's scheme should be re-considered.

Figures derived from Game-Council Annual Report 2011-2012 (the latest report):
Number of recreational hunters 17,946
Number of 'game' / feral animals killed in State Forests 18,485
Number of these animals that were Rabbits 7,312 (39% of feral animals removed)
Contribution of recreational hunters through licenses $60

Assuming relatively static culling figures, we can calculate:

Cost of each recreational hunter to taxpayer of NSW $351.05 (6,300,000 / 17,946)
Cost of each feral animal removed by a recreational hunter to taxpayer of NSW $340.82 (6,300,000 /18,485)
Cost of removing a single rabbit by recreational hunters $340.82

Now if we add a little perspective:

From the Game Council Public Benefit Assessment pg 19-25:

Cost of culling a single feral deer removal from Royal National Park under a NPWS program $308
Estimated environmental cost of a fox $26.40
Estimated environmental cost of a cat $8.00
Estimated cost of a fox on Agricultural productivity $2.94
Estimated cost of a rabbit on Agricultural productivity $0.69

From the ‘Best Practice Feral Pig Management Guide in the Burdekin River Catchment, pg 10:

Aerial shooting of a pig $25.90
Aerial Baiting of a pig $37.19
Trapping of a pig $62.90

Cheers

[photohiker]

tell me what are you afraid of the most... walking in a National Park or driving on a highway at 100 Kms?

Why is this even suggested as a comparison?

Before the hunters pushed their way into NP's there was zero risk of being shot while bushwalking, now the risk while bushwalking has increased enormously, while the driving risk has stayed exactly the same.

tell me what are you afraid of the most... Jumping out of a plane without a parachute or lying on the train track while a train approaches?

What has your enormous risk increased to ?

We don't know until we get results back from this insane experiment. That's the point, but the % increase from 0 to X is an infinite increase, and an impost on every non-hunter who enters NP's in NSW.

Saying or implying that the risk is 'low' does not alter the fact that this is an ADDED risk that was not there before.

[wearthefoxhat]

Mad dog..don't forget to add the 720,000 feral and game animals taken off private land... how does that extrapolate cost wise?

[wearthefoxhat]

Based on commercial removal cost estimates for particular species ($5,000 per head for wild dogs; $500
per head for wild deer; $300 per head for feral pigs; $100 per head for foxes, feral goats and feral cats; $10
per head for rabbits and hares), Forests NSW indicated the potential saving achieved was $2.4 million during
2011/2012.

[wearthefoxhat]

Hunters help feral pig disease project
Game hunting licence holders played a key
role during 2011/2012 to help the NSW Department
of Primary Industries identify disease
risks associated with feral pigs.
The challenge was to take blood and tissue
samples from harvested feral pigs on public
and private land, with DPI analysing the samples
to detect the presence of diseases such
as brucella suis, which can be transmitted
from feral pigs to humans and commercially
farmed pigs.
During March to June of the reporting period,
licence holders volunteered to collect samples
from harvested feral pigs in the Tamworth, Walgett, Bourke, Narrabri, Macquarie Marshes, Glen Innes and
Armidale regions.
The samples will be tested at the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute with results to be made avai

[wearthefoxhat]

Compliance
During the reporting period, Game Council continued its strong focus on ensuring hunters comply with licence
conditions applying to declared State forests. Working in conjunction with NSW Police and Forests
NSW, a total of 18 major compliance operations, and regular patrols, were carried out in 2011/12.
In addition to issuing Penalty Infringement Notices and court prosecutions of individuals alleged to have been
hunting illegally, Game Council pursues a policy of seeking forfeiture of hunting equipment of persons found
guilty in court of illegal hunting practices.

[wearthefoxhat]

Just thought I would do some cherry picking (like yourself) from the latest report...

[maddog]

Mad dog..don't forget to add the 720,000 feral and game animals taken off private land... how does that extrapolate cost wise?

The owner of private land can dispose of pest animals as they see fit, so they are irrelevant to the debate.

Cheers

[wearthefoxhat]

Mad dog..don't forget to add the 720,000 feral and game animals taken off private land... how does that extrapolate cost wise?

The owner of private land can dispose of pest animals as they see fit, so they are irrelevant to the debate.

Cheers

Ha ... thats BS and you know it... you just can't admit that rec hunters have a positive contribution... its no wonder you are the laughing stock of the rural community and the butt of regular jokes.

[Turfa]

...Is this true? or another media beat up. because if it is they should change that to the way we do it here in NSW. A property owner, manager or employee can cull deer 12 months of the year..

yes, they can.... & rightly so, but once again this shows the hypocrisy of the Game Council & the 'conservation hunting' argument regarding game species.

If it is appropriate for farmers to cull deer on their properties in any quantity, at any time of year, why do deer in state forests & NP's need to be "managed" by bag limits & restricted seasons, if not for the purpose of providing a continuing supply of target animals. It also invalidates your previous position regarding deer seasons being for the "humane" purpose of preventing orphaned young. If this is so important, why are farmers exempt ?

Please explain to me how setting a bag limit on deer contributes to the stated goal of reducing invasive species on public lands ?

Also, explain to me why I hear so many hunters complaining that an area has been "shot out"........ surely that is a good thing if you are truly interested in conservation of our public lands.... .... but of course from the hunters perspective is is not. However, it does quite clearly show that hunters have a desire to maintain stocks of invasive species in state forests & national parks.....

Please explain to me how that is the right attitude to have towards our national parks ?

I am still very curious to hear your answers to my questions regarding hunters and the Game Council's apparent desire to maintain stocks of pest animals rather than eradicate them.

[wearthefoxhat]

Based on commercial removal cost estimates for particular species ($5,000 per head for wild dogs; $500
per head for wild deer; $300 per head for feral pigs; $100 per head for foxes, feral goats and feral cats; $10
per head for rabbits and hares), Forests NSW indicated the potential saving achieved was $2.4 million during
2011/2012.

wait a minute this can't be right...The Forests NSW have said they have saved up to $2.4 m through contributions from rec hunters...this has to be a typo? surely...

Of course its not! get real guys this story is going to get better..

[Turfa]

Ha ... thats BS and you know it... you just can't admit that rec hunters have a positive contribution... its no wonder you are the laughing stock of the rural community and the butt of regular jokes.

Hmm... running out of intelligent things to say are we ??

You do yourself a disservice making cheap comments like that. You have come on to this forum to put forward your argument & while you have been debated on your stance, you have been treated very fairly by the standards of internet discussion forums.... cetainly better than I have seen anyone with a conservationist stance treated on hunting focussed boards.... kit is a shame that you resort to this kind of response.

[maddog]

Which rural community is that, Fox-hat?

Are you suggesting that cocky's cannot shoot pests on their own land? Some cocky's may allow recreational hunters on their land, but many don't.

Cheers

[wearthefoxhat]

"If it is appropriate for farmers to cull deer on their properties in any quantity, at any time of year, why do deer in state forests & NP's need to be "managed" by bag limits & restricted seasons, if not for the purpose of providing a continuing supply of target animals. It also invalidates your previous position regarding deer seasons being for the "humane" purpose of preventing orphaned young. If this is so important, why are farmers exempt ?"

I simply don't know and I am not prepared to guess either which seems to be the norn for you fellas..

"Please explain to me how setting a bag limit on deer contributes to the stated goal of reducing invasive species on public lands ?"

Bag limits are only for Hog deer I believe. I presume (but could be wrong) that they are not a direct threat to there enviroment and are also considered a game animal not a pest.

"Also, explain to me why I hear so many hunters complaining that an area has been "shot out"........ surely that is a good thing if you are truly interested in conservation of our public lands.... .... but of course from the hunters perspective is is not. However, it does quite clearly show that hunters have a desire to maintain stocks of invasive species in state forests & national parks..... "

I will presume you have just made this up because it suits your argument... The fact that it has been "shot out" shows success from rec hunting ...does it not?

You guys keep falling flat on your face. Its no wonder your arguments hold no water.... they are illogical. manipulative and bordering on plain lies.

[wearthefoxhat]

Ha ... thats BS and you know it... you just can't admit that rec hunters have a positive contribution... its no wonder you are the laughing stock of the rural community and the butt of regular jokes.

Hmm... running out of intelligent things to say are we ??

getting a bit desperate are we?

You guys will fall by the way side just as the greens have good luck with everything lol...