Horses and heritage

[Lophophaps]

Charlie Lovick made a number of unsubstantiated claims yesterday in the media, many of which are at odds with the evidence on horse culling in Alpine areas.

I'm unaware of these comments. My post referred to the words in The Conversation.

His comments were not fair. they were biased and factually incorrect. he accused the authors of the report of not understanding the terrain , animal welfare and practical issues of feral horse management. Charlie stated that management of feral horses ought to be the province of MCAV families; that is, those with a commercial interest in exploiting the high plains.

I said that he made some fair comments. There was no assertion about how many of his comments were fair, just that fair comments were made, and that these should be considered. I'm unaware of any MCA-related plan. This may have been in the media on 6 September, not in The Conversation.

I disagree that Charlie lovick is the voice to listen to when making policy decisions on the management of feral animals in sensitive alpine areas. he might be a nice bloke but he is terminally biased in his regard on what is the best option of environmental policy in Alpine areas.

Part of the consultation process is to consider all who make submissions. By virtue of their long association with the region, the MCA are in the frame. Everyone is biased, everyone has their own views about what should be done. This will not preclude anyone from being involved.

Policy on feral species management ought to be made on deliberation of the evidence on what is best for the environment and the welfare of the horses, not on emotive appeal to culture. By all means celebrate out mountain cattleman culture but they do not manage the public Alpine areas any more and their voice should not be privileged over others because of historical connections to alpine industry.

This is an excellent summary. Those deliberating must make a disinterested decision based on the evidence.

[sambar358]

On "using a shotgun" for aerial shooting on horses. Shotguns have been used extensively in NZ for shooting of deer from helicopters for the overseas venison market but most shooters still prefer to use a self loading centre fire.....usually a 223 or 308. These are red deer which are about 1/3rd the weight of a mature horse though so more susceptible to a hit by a few pellets from an OO buck/SG round which is the most common used......these contain 9 round lead pellets in a 12 gauge cartridge each about 8mm in diameter. I've used these extensively years ago shooting feral pigs out west in NSW and they are quite effective at close range (30m) from a full choked shotgun but on a pig-sized animal 3 -4 pellet hits at that range is about normal.....so often more than 1/2 the pellet load can go "elsewhere" and that potentially could mean hitting and wounding other horses nearby. These shotgun rounds lack the range, power and velocity of a single centre fire projectile and in my view the chances of wounding something the size of a horse would be quite high. Head shots would still be required (and likely mandated) as body-shots would end-up in a wounded animal most times or a horse that takes a long time to go down while needlessly suffering.

Any shooter accredited for aerial culling on deer or other large animals is a good shot regardless of whether he/she's using a shotgun or centre fire rifle but as most shots will be taken on animals fleeing from the helicopter the inevitability of that method is always going to be the odd wounding regardless of what the shooter is using. Ground shooting by hunters is another option that doesn't seem to be getting a great deal of consideration......not the "sit back and snipe at long range over a bait station on the open plains" scenario that was mentioned in the discussion paper.....but rather in-bush stalking as you would with deer. I hunt sambar deer in areas where there are brumbies quite often and when compared to the deer I find the horses easy to approach upwind and I've photographed quite a few over the years in the bush. Their extensive trails are easy to move quietly along and they generally lead to a feed or watering area, a mineral lick or where they are camping. It's probably a method worth considering but of course it'd rely on having ground shooters with the smarts to hunt on foot in the bush....rather than hanging out the door of a helicopter while zooming around the mountains.

Interesting times......but you certainly can't and won't please all parties with this one. If Parks and the government feel that there is a need to do this for the sake of the environment then they should just do it and manage the flack that will surely come the best they can ! Cheers

s358

[Zapruda]

I just got back from a walk in the northern part of Kosciuszko and I was shocked to see the amount of horses and the damage that was being done.

I do most of my walking around Jagungal and southern Kosciuszko and have always been a fence sitter in regards to the horse debate. I could see damage and signs of horses but it always seemed fairly minimal.

I can say now that this is a real issue. The whole of Tantangara Plain was just covered in horse droppings and churned up earth. Every water source seemed to have some horse faeces in it . The horses were outwardly aggressive and were in groups of up to 20. There were hoof pads in every direction. I think I saw at least 100 horses over 2 days.

KNP is such a sensitive and important part of Australia. I would hate to see it damaged more than it already is.

I really think people need to have a good look (with their own eyes) at the damage being done up there.

Cheers

[newhue]

I am not sure if it going to matter about the horses, and there are many feral animals throughout the park doing just as much damage however less obvious; and yes that includes humans. If we were to talk about ecology and sustainability than humans would also remove themselves from the park as we too are hard hoofed, or choose to be.
The real issue is far bigger than Kosci however relates directly to it, and we need more and more areas put aside, expanded, or rejuvenated. The real issue is the fossil fuels consumed in vehicles for the tourist to explore the wonders of Kosci, the choppers that do the culling or survey power lines, the planes for joy rides or deliver us bushwalkers from a a far to experience the great outdoors. The exponential curb on humans numbers and pollution from self absorbed activity has turned, and global warming is shooting for the sky. It may be 50 years away, it may be 100 years away before it's so in our face we can't do anything. But global warming needs addressing today or the horses along Kosci and most other things will fade to grey.

[stry]

Zapruda's pic shows a very high proportion of what appear to be immature animals of varying age classes in that mob.

This suggests that the estimates and opinions about low breeding and survival rates referred to earlier in the thread may be seriously out of whack.

[Lophophaps]

The real issue is far bigger than Kosci however relates directly to it, and we need more and more areas put aside, expanded, or rejuvenated. The real issue is the fossil fuels consumed in vehicles for the tourist to explore the wonders of Kosci, the choppers that do the culling or survey power lines, the planes for joy rides or deliver us bushwalkers from a a far to experience the great outdoors. The exponential curb on humans numbers and pollution from self absorbed activity has turned, and global warming is shooting for the sky. It may be 50 years away, it may be 100 years away before it's so in our face we can't do anything. But global warming needs addressing today or the horses along Kosci and most other things will fade to grey.

Valid points. When I was a lot younger I went away most weekends, anything from a day trip to several weeks. Now I go on a much smaller number of trips for 10-15 days, thus having a smaller carbon footprint. Global warming is a huge economic worry, a point lost on the short term thinkers.

Zapruda's pic shows a very high proportion of what appear to be immature animals of varying age classes in that mob.

This suggests that the estimates and opinions about low breeding and survival rates referred to earlier in the thread may be seriously out of whack.

Are you saying that the estimates are low or high? Regardless, feral horses are damaging the Australian alps, and action is needed. Downstream of the alps there's about $50 billion in farms. If the water supply is compromised then the farm yield will drop.

[sambar358]

Zapruda's pic shows a very high proportion of what appear to be immature animals of varying age classes in that mob.

This suggests that the estimates and opinions about low breeding and survival rates referred to earlier in the thread may be seriously out of whack.

Feral horse breeding and survival rates will vary according to the type of terrain and quality of feed that is in the area that the horses range over. Certainly the mob in the pic above has a number of younger horses in it and they all seem to be in good nick. I mostly see feral horses in the bush over the winter where they tend to drop down under the permanent snow to tough it out in the thermal cover and they are doing it harder then and their poorer body condition and likely lower foal survival rates would reflect that.

What that image also has is quite few horses that don't fit the "typical" brumpy profile of a stumpy, scruffy little horse of the type usually trotted-out by those opposed to any culling. I would expect that the big grey in the foreground has more stock horse than brumby in him and the few lighter ones off the to the left likewise. "Seeding" of the feral horses has been going on for a long time largely to improve the saleability of any foals captured by the brumby runners and those sanctioned by Parks to trap and remove feral horses.....although none would admit to it of course. I came across a mob of horses a few years ago on the Bogong HP that were being led by a lovely-looking large black mare that had a collar and cow bell around her neck and I could hear that bell clanking-away well before the horses appeared along the pad. No prizes for guess what that was for !

So I tend to take the bleatings of the brumby people with a grain of salt.....while they certainly care for the mountains and the horses.....some of their number have been contributing to the feral horse build-up by deliberate 'herd improvement" of the horses in the ANP and Kosi Parks for quite a long time for their own ends be that financial, recreational or otherwise. Cheers

s358

[north-north-west]

So I tend to take the bleatings of the brumby people with a grain of salt.....while they certainly care for the mountains and the horses.....some of their number have been contributing to the feral horse build-up by deliberate 'herd improvement" of the horses in the ANP and Kosi Parks for quite a long time for their own ends be that financial, recreational or otherwise.

These people (like the MCA) care mostly about their own unfettered access to and use of the high country. Little if anything of what they do (and want) is in the land's best interests.

[newhue]

Valid points. When I was a lot younger I went away most weekends, anything from a day trip to several weeks. Now I go on a much smaller number of trips for 10-15 days, thus having a smaller carbon footprint. Global warming is a huge economic worry, a point lost on the short term thinkers.

Yes I think no one has their head around it actually, with most preferring to listen to the politicians rather than the scientist. No one wants to accept the massive financial changes that is coming let alone our standards of life. And just like the world wars changed peoples lived forever, so will GW. I don't particularly like my thinking that now days I'm preferring national parks to be locked for all but our native species. But I have to accept this if there is a reason for having children. From microorganisms to Kangaroos, we are going to need what biodiversity we have left big time. And given we have so little remnant Australian bush left from just 3 or 4 generations of occupation, it's hard to see anything but NP's being left in just another one or two. Chuck GW into the equation and the mass death of humans and animal species will be quite a spectacle.

[Xplora]

Zapruda's pic shows a very high proportion of what appear to be immature animals of varying age classes in that mob.

This suggests that the estimates and opinions about low breeding and survival rates referred to earlier in the thread may be seriously out of whack.

You may be right about the breeding estimate but not sure how you could work out the ages of the horses from that pic. I have seen the horses on Long Plain and many other places and many are very small. Runts if you like probably due to inbreeding so height is not a good indicator of maturity. Young males will be sent off or isolated once at maturity and they sometimes hang together. The alpha stallion will keep his mares close until he has served them and then he will cut them out of the mob. There could be a couple of yearlings in the pic but without further information I would suggest is is mostly a mob of mares and the gray on its own is the stallion.

[Xplora]

I am not sure if it going to matter about the horses, and there are many feral animals throughout the park doing just as much damage however less obvious; and yes that includes humans. If we were to talk about ecology and sustainability than humans would also remove themselves from the park as we too are hard hoofed, or choose to be.

I have seen the terrible things humans can do to our heritage but we are constrained to some degree and can also be managed to some degree. The places we walk or drive can be controlled (to some degree). You cannot control the movements of feral animals but here we are discussing the controlling of their numbers to lessen the impact. This is also addressed in sensitive areas with people numbers. Humans do not generally congregate in a sensitive bog and churn it up and by keeping to tracks the damage is contained. Keeping people out of parks will not foster any consideration for them. It will in fact do the opposite and in the end you will find those who want to do the wrong thing will just break the gate and have a free run. They are doing it now. 3 gates in my immediate area have been busted open this winter and that is just the ones I know about or have seen. Last year I was told of at least a dozen and nobody was caught. We came very close this year but even working with the local Police it is just too remote.
Education is the key and we should endeavour to teach those wanting to enjoy our outdoors how to do it responsibly as well as take a stand against those who do the wrong thing.

[newhue]

Xplora, does't it seem odd that humans being the most destructive animal on the planet turn the situation to justify their wants. So typical to control or eliminate what they see as an issue which is nothing more than waste from their original want; to open up the high country for farming. Now looking to rid the mountains of their waste but still accept they "humans" are responsible and deserving to continue on with their wants.

A camera at a gate can record vandalism, usage, type of user, and gather data for the holy grail...money. We are happy to put them all over the road network, or in malls, shops, personal vehicles and so on. A motion triggered long life came surely can't be beyond the budget of the $3000 gate in the first place. It will come to that before just saying to humans these places are scared for all but you.

Genetic modification as about the only true answer I can see. I'd like to hear from others if they know why humans can't man up and accept why it's not more in the open. Perhaps fears of the gene getting into family cat, dog, horses, and goats is about all I can find as a reason. However it seems if Australia is to control feral animals of any creed, modification so all born are males is about the only cheap, easy, and best bang for the buck. Very human. We are happy to fly to the moon and leave waste in space, genetically modify food, artificially inseminate babies, but appear to scared to deal with potential gene contamination of uncontrolled pets getting loose in society.

[Xplora]

A camera at a gate can record, vandalism, usage, type of user, and gather data for the holy grail...money. We are happy to put them all over the road network, or in malls, shops, personal vehicles and so on. A motion triggered long life came surely can't be beyond the budget of the $3000 gate in the first place. It will come to that before just saying to humans these places are scared for all but you.

Cameras at gates or anywhere else for the purpose of recording possible illegal behaviour require a warrant issued by a court. They also have to be monitored regularly. Cameras are installed at some gates but sometimes these cameras are discovered and destroyed or stolen. Warrants are not handed out just because a gate is installed. There has to be evidence of consistent or persistent offences. I am sure the placement and monitoring of cameras would far exceed the revenue. All it takes is for the number plate of the vehicle to be covered or the person to wear a hat.

My greater concern for this planet at the moment is not climate change. I doubt we will survive long enough for it to be enough of a destructive force to wipe us off the planet. Of greater concern is Nth Korea, China and of course the choice in the next US president. What choice. Population control may be done without the need for genetic modification.

[newhue]

I would love to digress about peaceful relations with neighbours remain peaceful. But when Australia wants to spend 130 billon on war machines we get what we get. Perhaps just a tad, just if a tiny 1 billion was spent on feral animal eradication and expanding national parks we could all perish knowing at least we wet out trying to fix out planet instead of being hell bent on destroying it. But yes the recent development is concerning.

[neilmny]

Late arrival..............

............... The shotgun with a choke at a good range can, depending on the load, places a number of projectiles into the animal with one pull of the trigger. The variable choke used on the Mossberg can reduce the spread of the shot at a larger distance.

From the Victorian website - http://www.gma.vic.gov.au/hunting/deer/hunting-methods

"A minimum bore of 20 and a maximum bore of 12, using a single solid projectile with a minimum weight of 245 grains (15.88 grams) and the firearm must be fitted with either: a front and rear iron sight (other than a beaded sight or sights); or a telescopic sight; or a reflex sight."

With a single solid slug a choke wouldn't be relevant.
That is unless people involved in a cull are permitted to use firearms not permitted for use by hunters.
The impact of the large solid projectile would be huge at close range but the actual accurate placement of the shot is no better if not worse than a center fire rifle.

One thing that Charlie said that can't be denied is that there is a hell of a lot of deer out there (everywhere).

..................My greater concern for this planet at the moment is not climate change. I doubt we will survive long enough for it to be enough of a destructive force to wipe us off the planet. Of greater concern is Nth Korea, China and of course the choice in the next US president. What choice. Population control may be done without the need for genetic modification.

Very true Xplora, it sure puts the wind up me. All it takes is a some overblown ego and the whole planet will be in total deep manure.
Just saw on the news this morning that Nth. Korea has tested another nuclear weapon.

[Moondog55]

Vermin destruction isn't the same as hunting and while humane slaughter is a consideration it should not override the main aim of the exercise which is to rid the fragile country of a pest animal.
In this instance biological control simply isn't feasible unless you are willing to walk in an area with tigers and pumas running around hungry
I would personally prefer to see trapping and slaughter for human consumption but that isn't going to happen here because of sentimental feelings about horsemeat; which by the way is delicious and better balanced for human nutrition than beef.
I believe that some of those belled and haltered animals may be part of the current trapping program too, at least in and around Falls Creek area

[north-north-west]

I would personally prefer to see trapping and slaughter for human consumption but that isn't going to happen here because of sentimental feelings about horsemeat; which by the way is delicious and better balanced for human nutrition than beef.

Except trapping and transportation for slaughter is about the most distressing experience you can put the animals through.

I don't have any problem with killing ferals (or farmed animals). I do, however, believe we have to minimise the pain and stress we put those animals through prior to death. A bullet to the head from a chopper is the quickest, cleanest and easiest method. There also appears to be considerable evidence that it is the most effective at reducing numbers.

[newhue]

aerial control has been very successful up here in Sundown NP in Qld. 1000's of deer and goat are killed within a week by helicopter snipers. However the problem lay with NP's don't have fences, and more feral animals move in from neighbouring property to replace the dead. Genetic modification is as broad as the fearls can run. I believe cane toads are on target for genetic modification, it will get up cause no one has pet toads. But it's too much for humans to ask for careless live stock owners and pet owners to be at risk of male producing fearls spuding their beloved animal. The money from horse breading and accompanying paraphernalia has far more value to the "jobs and growth" type than any national park or the environment.

[Moondog55]

A bullet to the head from a chopper is the quickest, cleanest and easiest method. There also appears to be considerable evidence that it is the most effective at reducing numbers.

I think that has to do with the so-called "Predator effect" noted in deer populations in Yellowstone NP when wolves were reintroduced there, something to do with interrupting breeding behaviour when constantly on the look-out for danger

[Xplora]

I would personally prefer to see trapping and slaughter for human consumption but that isn't going to happen here because of sentimental feelings about horsemeat; which by the way is delicious and better balanced for human nutrition than beef.
I believe that some of those belled and haltered animals may be part of the current trapping program too, at least in and around Falls Creek area

It doesn't bother me if people want to eat horse. We have too many being produced every year because of the racing industry and the slow ones go to dog food. Meat production for human consumption is very selective and trapping is very slow. As NNW said it is a long way to the abattoir and very stressful which will only produce tougher meat (apart from the humane concerns which I agree with). I am also aware of a sort of local to the BHP area who is alleged to be seeding the feral horses. In a recent burn off by DWELP around the Bundarra catchment a number of horses were flushed out. I found 2 young fillies, one black and white and the other black and tan. They made their way down the BHP road to the Omeo Hwy then up the Highway. They were not ferals as I was able to get pretty close. They even came toward me. The trapping program around Falls is not really aimed at ridding the BHP of horses. I think the population is going to be held around 60 and any dangerous animals will be removed.

Head shots are not easy and you will find a shot to the chest most effective. It is the weakest part.

[newhue]

Why is it humans think they need to kill humanly when its ok to show up with bulldozers, chains, mulching mainlines or fire. Is it an attempt to relieve themselves of guilt once again. The wombat, possum, echidna, badicoote and whatever else didn't get consideration when the housing estate went on. And I'm sure when the high county was opened up no on payed much attention to what was made distressed, homeless or injured on the day.

I think the army, or a select part of it would be a good choice. They can stalk and pop anything feral for X months of the year. Perhaps a annual thing for a while. Be good training for them, we are paying for them anyway, and they should have the decline to be trusted.

[Xplora]

Why is it humans think they need to kill humanly

The law also says it has to be done this way.

I think the army, or a select part of it would be a good choice. They can stalk and pop anything feral for X months of the year. Perhaps a annual thing for a while. Be good training for them, we are paying for them anyway, and they should have the decline to be trusted.

The law says they cannot be used for this purpose. They are not in training to kill animals and we do not pay for their training for them to do so. Taking an elite group of fighting men and using them for feral animal control would never be accepted by Parliament or the majority of people. Those few who are highly trained are already exhausted and personally I am concerned about the number of tours our elite have been forced to do. The average grunt is not a hunter nor is he (and now she) necessarily a marksman(person). The weapons they use are not designed for this purpose and their training is very basic. Using our military for such a purpose would IMO also lead to tragedy.

I do understand where you are coming from and I think the world will need some form of population control in the future. They used to start a war for that purpose. Not sure if I would be encouraging that again. You also seem to be looking toward the wrongs of Australia's colonial past. We all need to build a bridge and get over those issues. If you are concerned about the little creatures in danger then you should be concerned for the small life in the peat bogs who are threatened. Controversial as it may be, if it were up to me I would use a poison and put it into feeders so only horses and deer could reach it. I am sure this will spark considerable debate. 1080 is considered moderately humane but only because it takes a longer period of time for the poison to become effective. Time is the scale on which it is measured not pain. 1080 is used widely now and there is research currently into better options. Humans affected by 1080 have reported no pain. Death in herbivores is usually as a result of heart failure (ventricular fibrillation) and this is instant. The animal shows few signs until death is imminent. I don't say it is not without problems but if you are looking for a quick result then it should also be considered. It has been proven to be an effective control of deer at Wilson's Prom where in the 1950's it was used to control rabbits. The Hog deer population was nearly wiped out which led to calls for it to be stopped and a deer breeding program introduced to satisfy the hunters. Now we have Parks Vic leading hunters on Hog deer culls in the Prom again. If the past is to be used we should learn lessons from it and not repeat the same mistakes.

You have made me think in the past few days and it is good to be reminded of how we can reduce our carbon footprint. Perhaps it is not for this topic but I would encourage you to start a topic specific about it if you like. Not sure what section but you could call it 'How big is your footprint?' or 'How green are you living?' Maybe some clever person will create and algorithm to give a 'green index' by answering questions about your lifestyle.

[sambar358]

Hmmmm.....1080 'eh......the cure for all our ills......not !

While 1080 poisoning for horses and deer may impact on the target animals if bait stations were designed to exclude other animals from taking the baits the other issue is the bi-kill of animals and birds from them feeding on the carcasses of the dead horses and deer. Would the community accept large scale secondary poisoning of our eagles, hawks, owls, possums, marsupial mice, tiger quolls and all manner of assorted bush birds that would take advantage of the bounty left by the 1080 in the name of ridding the bush of some feral horses and deer. Likely not !

I often set my trail cameras up on my sambar kills targeting wild dog images....but what I also get are lots of images of all of the above birds and animals feeding off the carcass as well and of course if this was an animal killed by 1080 poison then the likelihood of large-scale kills of non-target species is very real. A bullet is totally selective......1080 is certainly not and if the government departments in their desperation to "do something" about the horses and deer in the mountains go down the 1080 path then it'll be a sad day for all......and especially-so for the long term viability of any animals and birds that feed-off something dead that they find in the bush.

Xplora.....Parks will never admit to deliberately poisoning hog deer at Wilsons Prom....but they have certainly used plenty of 1080 on the rabbits and I'm sure quite a few hog deer have "accidentally" taken these baits laid for rabbits. But raise this with them and they will vehemently deny it....every time ! There was never "a call" from hunters for Parks to stop poisoning hog deer at the Prom because it was never officially happening.....what did happen though was that PV were challenged over it, the practice was denied although 1080 is still used for rabbit control down there and no-doubt hog deer and native herbivores take the "rabbit baits" now and again too if the bait stations aren't specifically designed to prevent it.

There has never been legal, public hog deer hunting at the Prom....illegal poaching most certainly....but never legal hunting although that may change given the current situation with PV using hunters to cull hog deer at the Prom over the past 12 months. I don't know what "breeding program" you are referring to that was initiated to "satisfy hunters" though.....maybe the Blond Bay Hog Deer Project which was and still is a government sanctioned and supported initiative within the Blond Bay State Game Reserve on the shores of the Gippsland Lakes which allows limited balloted hog deer hunting annually on the population of hog deer within the Reserve. For the uninitiated Hog deer are a small deer about the size of a large Labrador dog that are found along coastal Victoria from south Gippsland to the NSW border. They were originally introduced 150 years ago from the native Sri Lanka where they are now classed as Endangered. Populations throughout their range are quite low although stable, they are regarded (even by government) as having a low impact on the environment although being an "introduced species" affords them a reasonable level of vilification from various sectors of the community. However our hog deer are a significant conservation resource considering the situation that they are in throughout their native range. They should not be lumped-in with the issues that sambar and the other more prolific deer species are presenting at the moment.

Yep......hunters are assisting Parks Vic with their deer management issues at the moment.....in a number of small Parks & Reserves north of Melbourne, in part of the Mitchell River National Park, in the Bogong Unit of the ANP around Falls Creek all on sambar and down at Wilsons Prom for hog deer. However Parks Vic are hardly "leading hunters" in these initiatives as essentially Parks know nothing of the deer, deer hunting or how to reduce their numbers. If anything the deer hunting organisations through those hunters involved in these culling exercises (at their own expense I hasten to add) are very-much educating participating Parks Vic staff about the deer in their country and how best to go about reducing their numbers. So essentially "Parks came to the Hunters" here.....it was certainly not the other way 'round at all. These programs have had additional value apart from some short-term reduction in deer numbers in some locations as it's been an opportunity for Parks to learn a bit more about what makes the "Black Sheep of the Parks Vic Family" tick and that's probably helped in how they see hunters & hunting in the bigger picture of a multi-use National Parks system that is (or should be) equally inclusive of all......but a long way to go there still I think. Interesting times ahead. Cheers

s358

1080 poisoning in Parks......NO THANKS....I'd rather have the horses and deer than risk loosing this !

[Xplora]

[quote="sambar358"
While 1080 poisoning for horses and deer may impact on the target animals if bait stations were designed to exclude other animals from taking the baits the other issue is the bi-kill of animals and birds from them feeding on the carcasses of the dead horses and deer. Would the community accept large scale secondary poisoning of our eagles, hawks, owls, possums, marsupial mice, tiger quolls and all manner of assorted bush birds that would take advantage of the bounty left by the 1080 in the name of ridding the bush of some feral horses and deer. Likely not ! [/quote]

This was one of the problems I eluded to and I knew I could count on you to bring it up. We have chatted about this before. 1080 is already in large scale use and now aerial baiting has commenced in Vic so is there a problem with bi-kill now? I would prefer something which does not affect other animals feeding on the carcass and in time it will be developed but does 1080 have as much of an effect on other mammals feeding on the poisoned carcass as assumed? There needs to be some research on this. Ground shooting projects in Alpine areas for deer have been ineffectual. I suspect it would be similar for horses in closed country. The difference being horses will usually be in larger numbers when encountered and a few shooters could get a few horses until they bolted into the bush. I still feel a combination of methods needs to be employed and the effectiveness of each determined.

[sambar358]

[quote="sambar358"
This was one of the problems I eluded to and I knew I could count on you to bring it up. We have chatted about this before. 1080 is already in large scale use and now aerial baiting has commenced in Vic so is there a problem with bi-kill now?

With the extension of the use of 1080 poison to include aerial distribution methods.....ie dropping large numbers of 1080 laced baits into the bush from a low flying helicopter or fixed wing aircraft certainly raises the issue of bi-kill and how any threat to non-target animals will be assessed. But I suspect that it won't be evaluated or form part of the criteria for usage as it is difficult if not impossible to do. How do you count eagles, owls, hawks, currawongs, crows, marsupial mice, possums, quolls, bandicoots etc in a huge area of bush then re-count all them again after those areas are baited. Impossible of course and probably not even considered. Aerial 1080 baiting is a response to concerns about build-ups of wild dogs around farmland and I believe a number of areas have been selected in the Tambo Valley in eastern Vic. for trials but I am unaware of the pre & post baiting evaluations and whether non-target species impact was part of the grand plan. Of course if these trials are successful in reducing wild dog numbers then I'd expect that this sort of strategy will be expanded into other areas......and likely extended to feral horse and deer control too.

In the past 1080 baiting for wild dogs was heavily regulated and done by trained departmental staff or land holders who had completed a course in the safe handling and correct application of 1080 poison baits. All bait stations were marked on a GPS, flagged so the public could see and avoid them and after the working-life of the bait had expired all bait stations were supposed to be re-visited and baits not taken were removed. Very labour-intensive and expensive I'd think but the process has been considerably broadened now with far less regulation.....land holders can bait their property boundary and back some km's into the public land beyond and there are no requirements to bury baits or retrieve any baits that are not consumed. And now aerial baiting being trialled and most-likely extended to other areas once the trials are assessed....but I doubt whether the impact of the 1080 baiting on non-target animals will form part of that assessment.

The extension of aerial baiting for wild dogs could-well have an impact on sambar deer numbers too however increasing rather than reducing the number. The random nature of aerial baiting in these large areas will certainly discourage any hunters who use a dog (either scent trailing hounds or a companion gundog) from hunting in these areas as the chance of the dog(s) snaffling a 1080 bait they come-across while they are hunting would be significant. Certainly the Tambo Valley trial areas are very popular sambar hunting areas with quite a few hound crews and most years they'd take several 100 of sambar out of those areas. However I hear that since the aerial baiting trials commenced they are hunting elsewhere due to the risk of their hounds picking-up a bait. And ditto for hunters using a gundog.....not worth the risk to a valued and well-trained gundog so go somewhere else. So the sambar get a break, breed-up with minimal intervention and the strategy to hopefully solve one problem then causes another to become evident.

But a sign of the times really.....the MCAV and VFF make a ruckus about the problems they are having with wild dogs eating their stock and claim that the current control methods are not doing the job. So DEWLP & PV come up with a plan to address that.....more 1080 baiting on public land using more liberal methods which may or may not have a significant impact on non-target species. But the bottom line really in all this is of course.....it's hard to prove it one way or the other but my position on large-scale 1080 aerial baiting (for dogs, deer, horses) has always been......WHY TAKE THE RISK ? And hopefully I'm not alone with that. Cheers

s358

[stry]

You're not alone with your concerns about 1080.

There is too much pressure on raptors,in particular, as it is without taking this risk.

[newhue]

Xplora, very diplomatically put, and I will accept your advice to go away. I don't have many answers, I just try and speak a bit for the animals and the environment. Humans enjoy the gravy train of their current thinking and not willing to think outside the commercial self interested box they live in. 1080 soaked carrots from choppers in Tassie dropped over single specie plantation timbers is an example. The biodiversity of a car park, and killed every thing that came to nibble on the precious commodity. Lucky for the animals Gunns went broke from corruption, or was it selling pulp for $6 per tone.

Laws can be changed, politicians do it all the time. For or elite to train more elite working a national park like an Afghanistan valley makes sense to me, and a reasonable use of money. It's just thinking outside the box. Not using a particular type of firearm is as trivial as our soldiers are over worked. Killing something that doesn't shoot back would probably be a welcomed relief, and wars don't have paid holidays. But I will bow out now and just read on from now. I fear the debate is all buy worthless anyway. Politicians and the ones with the money will decide what happens to the horses and National Parks. All this is just good conversation.

[north-north-west]

Why is it humans think they need to kill humanly when its ok to show up with bulldozers, chains, mulching mainlines or fire.

I have never shown up anywhere with even one bulldozer, chainsaw or mulching machine. Nor do I use campfires. In fact, like some others on this forum, I have protested against the use of bulldozers, chainsaws, mulching machines and fires in many places.

Regardless of bad behaviour in the past, we have a responsibility to try to do the right thing now. Provided, of course, that we can work out exactly what that is.

[Xplora]

Xplora, very diplomatically put, and I will accept your advice to go away.

Please don't. I do not have to agree with you but I do respect your right to speak. I know I am outspoken and many do not agree with me. It matters little. Sambar and I do not always agree but we actually get on very well. Like you said, it is good conversation and as long as it is not personal then I will not take it that way. I was serious about a living green topic and you have made me think.

On other things I have been reading about the effect of 1080 on other animals and the by-kill. It may not be as much of a problem as first considered. Native animals have a tolerance to the natural poison and the digestion process of birds may be an advantage as well. Much more to read on it as it does concern me too. The poison degrades quickly in the carcass as well. I have not seen any decrease in the number of meat eating birds since baiting started around her and we have a good number of eagles as well.

[puredingo]

Why anybody would use a shot gun on anything other than fowl, fox or rabbits is beyond me? But each to their own I suppose.

The Kiwi method of deer culling, for harvest anyway, is to get crippling shot in that will pull the animal up, bring the chopper down close enough for the shooter to jump out and slip a blade in behind the skull. Pull the guts out and hoist it out....Humane enough for ya?