Horses and heritage

[newhue]

I have no problem with your method puredingo. Humans have this human ideal that all needs to be extinguished immediately. In the wild some animals pull down others and start eating from the bum or the guts, so the victim has a slow painful experience. Youtube is full of leopards, cheetah, lion kill doing this. A bird will fly for some distance with its talons clutching the prey in what ever position it was snatched in before it starts tearing at the guts.
Of course quicker is better, but immediately is not always possible. A head shot from a chopper is an idealistic wish, maybe a couple in 10. But if humans don't die quickly, no euthanasia for us or a shot in the head so to speak, then why so humanly for the animal. Perhaps they to should accept the odds of a quick death for a wild animal is about the same for them. Oh look out, I can hear them murmuring lets sedate the horse now before we kill it.....

[Xplora]

I have no problem with your method puredingo. Humans have this human ideal that all needs to be extinguished immediately. In the wild some animals pull down others and start eating from the bum or the guts, so the victim has a slow painful experience. Youtube is full of leopards, cheetah, lion kill doing this. A bird will fly for some distance with its talons clutching the prey in what ever position it was snatched in before it starts tearing at the guts.
Of course quicker is better, but immediately is not always possible. A head shot from a chopper is an idealistic wish, maybe a couple in 10. But if humans don't die quickly, no euthanasia for us or a shot in the head so to speak, then why so humanly for the animal. Perhaps they to should accept the odds of a quick death for a wild animal is about the same for them. Oh look out, I can hear them murmuring lets sedate the horse now before we kill it.....

This is something I mull over from time to time. I have to admit to the killing of many animals and even without legislation I would say for my own standard I would not want any animal to suffer. Not every shot is an instant kill and it does not sit well with me when they suffer because of my negligence (in a broad term). I have slaughtered for the table and was taught a way by a professional that would produce a clean and quick death for sheep and pigs but by standards these days it would not be acceptable. Brutality expressed toward animals is different from trying to do the right thing and failing. Those who are brutally cruel to animals usually go on to express similar behaviour toward humans. I have nursed 2 people to their death from cancer and it is not pretty but in the end they were drugged up so much on morphine I doubt they felt anything. Animals cannot sit down and discuss the morality of the issue as we can. For them it is a matter of survival but for us it is a choice to kill animals. For whatever reason we have been entrusted with the power, reasoning and accountability. At some stage a line must be drawn as to what is cruel and what is not, what is humane and what is not. The likes of PETA would have the line moved considerably to the left but if not for people such as them our standards would have been much lower. You are not far off the mark with your comment about sedation first and as I mentioned before a head shot is not really the best for a quick kill. The recommendation for deer hunters is to shoot for the vital organs (heart, lungs). Heads can be hard to hit as well as very boney. The risk of wounding is high. Centre of body mass has always proved to be most effective for me.

[sambar358]

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?

PD......methinks that you are embellishing the facts just a tad there......doing something like that (the knife finish-off) would result in the knife wielder being disembowelled rather than the animal I assure you.

Large scale aerial harvest and culling of deer, chamois and tahr was pioneered by NZ helicopter operators and shooters and began back in the 80's and the result was many 100's of thousands if not millions of animals shot mainly for the overseas venison and game meat market. And for a time anyway reducing animal numbers partially halted the environmental damage that they were doing. Most of these animals were head-shot as body-shooting damaged the carcass and devalued the meat. Shooting and retrieving 100+ red deer a day was common for the good helicopter operators but it was dangerous work and quite a few pilots and shooters were killed in crashes as all the flying was done at speed and very close to the ground in heavy country. And even today there are plenty of helicopter operators throughout NZ who are making a good living shooting for the overseas venison market or live capturing animals for sale to deer farmers. However the NZ aerial venison harvest boom happened as it was a commercial industry......there was big money to be made from shooting and selling the venison......and this industry was promoted and subsidised by the NZ government as well.

Anyone who's been to the South Island on NZ will know what sort of terrain all this happened in.....very steep, mountainous, heavy bush, high open tussock and country that a competent mountaineer would struggle with. Plenty of YouTube vids on this sort of stuff.....great low level flying that was highly dangerous and very precise head shooting running animals with an open-sighted self loading centre-fire rifle in 223 or 308. However in AU I doubt if we'd have the skilled helicopter pilots and shooters available to undertake aerial culling of feral horses and deer long-term.....but in the past we have used NZ operators in one-off culling exercise in NP's and these efforts have been successful but quite expensive on a per-animal killed basis.

I think if this (feral horse culling) goes ahead then the government will mandate head shots only as this is already accepted practice for kangaroo culling throughout the country and I doubt if the use of shotguns would be permitted. They'll have a lot of pressure on them to avoid any undue suffering to the horses and regulate for quick and clean kills to avoid as much backlash as possible from the animal welfare groups. I would also think that some consideration will be give to have an government approved observer along on the culls to ensure that all the rules and provisions of the culls are adhered to at all times. Time will tell I guess. Cheers

s358

[puredingo]

G'day Sambar, definitely NO embellishments here at all. This is a method practices by certain groups and I can prove it if you feel that necessary? But I'm not really trying to win an argument, my point was culling programs are never going to please everybody's idea of humaneness, so as long as the job gets done we might need to loosen up and think of the long term, greater good it will achieve.

Incidentally I dispatched a nice Rusa just last week with nothing but a 2 inch pocket folder! Dressed out and all, and if you don't believe that I'll put you on the phone to my daughter who I made help get the carcas back to the ute...you've never seen a person wash their hands so many times in one afternoon.

[sambar358]

PD......not doubting that your described method "does happen".....but I see that you've added "certain groups" to your response now where-as your original statement was "the Kiwi method" which is a broader and all inclusive term. Getting in close to a wounded animal to dispatch it with a knife is fraught with danger and certainly something with antlers or even sharp hooves shouldn't be dispatched at close range with a blade IMO !

Vic has minimum calibre regulations for our deer species while NSW has only minimum calibre recommendations & stop-short of mandating minimum calibre requirements so I guess in NSW you can get away with dispatching a deer with a pocket knife......get nabbed doing that in Vic and you'd likely be up on animal welfare charges. Good to hear that your daughter helped-out with your Rusa too.....more kids these days should be made aware that their nicely styrene-tray packaged meat isn't produced out the back of the supermarket and that in fact it was once a living, breathing animal. Cheers

s358

[newhue]

see Explora this is the ironic side of humanity. Happy to let fish suffocate on a deck or drown in a net. Drive a cow for hundreds of kilometres on a dusty dirt road. Bread chickens on hormones so they grow that fast they can't walk, but are ready to kill in 6 weeks. Clear bushland with a chain and bulldozers, then set it on fire to get rid of the waste. Spray pesticides on laws, crops, or road sides and ignore that it eventually makes it way into the creeks. Humans are only entrusted to look after animals when it suits them. I agree cruelty is not on, but it would also help if the west hardened up and were not so idealistic and insular from their food or killing. Where in reality they do it all the time and think nothing of it. However if it has an emotional string to pull they then go and bog it down on detail and cost. Similar to OH&S if you keep asking is it safe, the answer is usually no. Is it humane, the answer is the same. How long is humane 1 second, 2 seconds, 5 minutes. One shot or three?

We just complicate it to much, trying to be everything to everyone. There are horses left over from commercial activity we now like to call our heritage. It makes us feel warm and fuzzy. However the horses exist, and are growing in numbers in a fragile, slow growing environment which happens to be a national park. They are feral and have no place in a national park, so kill the dam things. 1 second, 1 shot, or 5 minutes is irrelevant. If people want to see horses in the high country, then go to a private commercial establishment and do what you like with the horses. Well that's how it seems to me.

[newhue]

Hey PD, I love that your daughter washed and washed her hands. She may never go hunting again or put food on the table, but she learned something very unique and good for her that day.
It is in my bag of plans that my boy when he is old old enough is to join a club and learn about firearms and marksmanship. He may grow out of it, but currently he laves to much on his plate, funny overall sorts of smells and looks of food, makes too many judgements on food without trying it, but like most boys has a glorified thing with guns. So I see a path to learn what a firearm is actually required for, and a broad respect that if animals die for him, it is not left on the plate. It will be good for him to go through the process for go to woh. He will definitely wash his hands a few times I imagine.

[newhue]

I wrote up a discussion on the various arguments used for and against the management of horses in the high country a while ago, https://wordsandwilds.wordpress.com/201 ... by-debate/

Hi Jess, I just read this. Nice work and very well written. I was thinking about the horse side of the argument with traditions or heritage. And it just came to me that once upon a time I really enjoyed cracker night for the queens birthday. A ride in the back of my uncles ute as we putted along the beach. Abseiling of the Shipstern in Lamington NP. Or watching the stars through the window coming home from grandmas laid out in the back of the family wagon. Or even a couple of travellers on a hot day. All things I really liked or valued, all no more, all a thing of the past, but all my heritage or traditions. I'm sure many others can relate. Just hope NP's treasure what National Parks are all about, our future as much as out heritage.

[juxtaposer]

Brace yourselves for the grisly truth about the "sacred" brumby.

http://www.greenaissance.com/The-Myth-o ... e-2015.pdf

[Xplora]

Brace yourselves for the grisly truth about the "sacred" brumby.

http://www.greenaissance.com/The-Myth-o ... e-2015.pdf

Well found. A good read. These feral horses are still not worth a great deal compared with those bred specifically. I would say their only really positive attribute are good strong feet (hooves). Many suffer from a locking stifle joint and most have very poor conformation. The article notes from early days how they have no shoulder which makes it very hard to fit a saddle to them or at least stop the saddle from running forward over the wither. I would not want one eating my grass either if it could not contribute in some way. I think in the end those soft hearted romantics will lose out and at least after reading this we can put to rest the notion they have any right due to heritage.

[newhue]

Hmm, does't read well for the brumbies.
I wonder if the feral wild dog has a place in our heritage also. Just needs a poem to romance over the great Aussie working dog that drove 3000 cattle from the high country to woop woop. But then, what about those donkeys and camels? Just easier to stick with native or introduced, feral or not.

[oyster_07]

I wonder if the feral wild dog has a place in our heritage also.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/wild-dog-fears-fuel-call-for-bounty/news-story/a8a3b10781d49e7d168e72df0d8bd14b

[sambar358]

Just withdrawing the $100 wild dog bounty as the Vic govt. did in 2015 doesn't necessarily mean that fewer wild dogs are being shot....all it does it take away the mechanism to put a number on the annual take. Numbers quoted in the Weekly Times article indicate that the recreational wild dog take was exceeding the take of the govt. employed 24 dog trappers so one would think that from an economic POV the $100 per dog bounty was a cheap way of killing more wild dogs compared to employing a heap of extra full time staff to do it.....seems not !

I would think that plenty of wild dogs are still being taken by recreational shooters as their motivation would not have been just the $100 bounty....the bounty was the "reward for effort" incentive that you could choose to take advantage of...or not. So while 2104 wild dog scalps were cashed-in during the 5 year life of the wild dog bounty scheme the actual number taken by recreational shooters over that time would have been far higher as I'd think many hunters (myself included) would take a few wild dogs each year and not bother to scalp them for the bounty.

Ditto for the $10 fox bounty......removing the bounty doesn't mean that rec. hunters aren't shooting foxes.....it just means that now there's no mechanism to put some numbers on their efforts and the government saves a bit of small change while spending many times that on strategies that may or may not end-up giving a better result as there is no way of accurately accounting for foxes killed by 1080 bait stations or aerial baiting programs as the victims are never searched for or counted. At least with 10,000 fox or 500 wild dogs scalps cashed-in annually they have some concrete data to determine what sort of an impact these programs are having......although these numbers are also rubbery as not everyone participates in the programs as I noted earlier.

All the re-introduction of a wild dog bounty will do is allow the government to quantify the annual take by rec. hunters again to better understand the big picture and I doubt if it'll make any difference on the no-bounty take at all as most hunters who encounter a wild dog in legal country will shoot it anyway....bounty or not ! And for those who may not be aware......wild dogs/dingoes are fully protected in the Alpine National Park and other deer hunting-approved Parks (as are foxes and feral cats) and hunters are only permitted to take sambar deer while hunting in the ANP. So in these localities wild dogs, foxes and cats have legislative protection while outside these areas we are encouraged to shoot them on sight ! Cheers

s358

[Xplora]

FACT -

wild dogs/dingoes are fully protected in the Alpine National Park and other deer hunting-approved Parks (as are foxes and feral cats) and hunters are only permitted to take sambar deer while hunting in the ANP. So in these localities wild dogs, foxes and cats have legislative protection while outside these areas we are encouraged to shoot them on sight !

This is because of their status as pests but the reality is when hunting deer if you see a fox in the NP (where you are allowed to hunt) then you would take a shot if so inclined and nobody would be any the wiser. I am sure Sambar358 does this but there is no need for him to incriminate himself. I am not as sure the majority of those hunting deer would be as inclined to take a shot at a pest as they would want to save that shot for a potential trophy or meat. A 308 is quite loud and not overly cheap if you store buy them. The argument from the ADA is making deer a pest would prevent them from hunting in areas of the NP which are currently allowed but that is only a legislative stroke of a pen to fix. The reality is by making it a pest it opens up more ways to control it and possibly more funding to do so. Deer are only one step away from pest classification and it is the lobbyists from ADA and the SSAA who are trying to prevent it. You can understand if you like deer hunting that seeing their numbers drastically cut would not be in your interest but I feel a drastic cut in the number of deer would mean those bona-fide hunters would not have to put up with the scorn created by the riff raff who are just after an easy target. These are the ones who trespass, spotlight and shoot from the road or campgrounds (poachers). If it were harder for them to find a deer they would give up. We regularly have people wanting a private source for hunting as the public areas near us are very popular. If we don't do something serious soon about these introduced ferals then they will be crying heritage for them as well. They have been around for over a 100 years already.

I never bothered with the dog bounty either. Too much hassle. I even think a few family pets were stolen and skinned by some dimwits during the bounty as well. I know this has strayed a bit from the horses discussion but it all relates to the overall view of managing pests.

[sambar358]

Xplora....as always you make some interesting observations. Shooting "pest animals" in a NP while hunting deer would disturb the country and likely reduce my chance of encountering a deer so I don't shoot foxes or wild dogs at all but I do make an exception for feral cats and if I encounter one (which I do occasionally) then it cops it without a second thought and I'll wear a blank day on the deer....and breaking the rules as well ! I would think the vast majority of rec. deer hunters in NP's would comply with the deer-only rule as a shot tends to put the deer into stealth mode making them even harder to find.

The other problem with declaring deer as a pest species then legislatively allowing them to be still hunted in NP's is that this then potentially allows a whole lot more legal gunfire (for want of a better word) in Parks and for other user groups I would think this would be of some concern. At the moment other user groups in deer hunting Parks tend not to encounter hunters and few if any would hear shots from hunters while they are in the bush walking or camping. That is what the "deer only" requirement was created for......minimum disturbance to other user groups. Open that up by declaring deer a pest species in Parks could attract a different hunting/shooting demographic which may well result in shooters legally using Parks for traditional pest animal shooting (rabbits, foxes,cats etc) and if this happens then that'll impact negatively on the ambience of our Parks for all......including legitimate deer hunters. So some careful thought needs to be applied here before legislators go changing the rules thinking that just declaring something a "pest" will solve all their problems....which it won't.

Linked with this......land holders with pest animals or plants on their property are required by law to control them and if they fail to do that to the satisfaction of the Land Manager then they are liable for prosecution and/or paying the costs to have a professional come in do it for them. Declaring deer a pest species.......and farmers groups are calling for this strong and loud.....could well backfire on them if farmers with "pest" deer problems that aren't addressed then get charged thousands for a pro-shooter to come in and address it. Rest-assured the government will be very reluctant to spend the huge sums of money required long-term to address the building deer numbers across the state.....and by transferring that responsibility to the private sector on who's property some of these pest deer are living/feeding could-well be one way of side-stepping that......so land holders need to be wary of what they wish for here I think.

Contrary to popular belief Victoria's deer with the exception of the Hog deer are afforded no legislative protection by their Game classification.....sambar, red, fallow, chital and rusa deer in the state can be hunted all year 'round, there is no bag limit and no requirement even to remove the venison from the bush. The only legislative requirement is that the hunter must be deer-licenced and an adequate calibre which enables a quick clean kill be used to hunt with. The exception to this is the 2 month "no deer hunting" in the Alpine National Park from Dec 15 - Feb 15 which is intended to exclude hunters from the Park during a time of high visitor usage.....which is fair enough.....elsewhere though on public and private land it's open slather 365 days a year ! Hog deer are governed by a one month season in April with a bag limit of one male and one female deer per hunter under a tag system. Hog deer are restricted to coastal Victoria, are a small and relatively benign species impact-wise & in relatively low numbers across their range. They are classed as an endangered species in their native Sri Lanka and as Victoria has a strong and viable hog deer population the Victorian hog deer are regarded internationally of some significance from a conservation viewpoint....hence their level of legislative protection via a season and bag limit.....not so for the rest though !

Land owners on their property and government departments on public land are not constrained by legislation when it comes to deer control at the moment......the rules that I am obliged to operate under as a hunter do not apply so farmers or their agents can spotlight deer, shoot as many as they like, leave them to rot, don't need a Vic Game Licence and as long as they use the required minimum calibre for a humane kill then it's open slather really. No more applying for cull permits, no more delays and red tape as was the case in the past. So the mechanism is already in place and deer are effectively already a pest species on private property and on public land when being managed via government culls. However many farmers just seem reluctant to embrace the new relaxed situation & simply declaring the deer "a pest" changes nothing really......they are still there and for their numbers to be significantly reduced people need to actually DO something. The current round of government talkfests, parliamentary enquires and public meetings will just be a waste of time and effort if some reasonable long-term strategies are not going to be put in place & then supported by the allocation of the significant finances that they will require.

In the last deer harvest survey undertaken by the Vic Game Management Authority it was determined that recreational deer hunters (currently 36,000 licenced in Vic) accounted for 65,000 deer in the year 2014/2015. If employing professional shooters to take that number of animals per annum, the cost to the Victorian government for those 65,000 deer would have exceeded the annual Health budget for the state for that year ! Can the Vic government afford that cost likely every year forever......certainly not. Will the government pay that.....definitely not......but it does put the issue into some perspective I think. By contrast.....rec. deer hunters are doing this for free....or actually paying the Vic government $100 PA to do it via our annual deer Game Licence but I guess the only up for me if deer were declared a pest species is that it'd save me $100 a year......but it won't make any difference to anything else I suspect. Interesting times ahead me-thinks. Cheers

s358

[newhue]

Would a State wide shooting competition held on a given weekend or week make a difference? Invested interest in guns, amo, clothing and whatever could be the promoters, and the shoots all catch up for the love and fun of it. A simple trophy and a fridge full of meat is the glory. Given it's a one off or twice a year thing the lands could be declared closed and a no go for other users. Of course the shooters will have to be clear of what and when to shoot for their own well being, plus assure a clean kill for the concerned.

[maddog]

G’day Sambar and Newhue,

Any fears (or hopes) of an unregulated free-for-all in our national parks as a result of the change in the status of deer from ‘game’ to ‘pest’ animal are unfounded. The future is not to go back to the past. The future of hunting in national parks being appropriately licenced, supervised and authorised recreationalists supplementing integrated pest control programs as is the case in NSW.

Of more relevance is the ability of landowners and managers to effectively deal with these pests, which a change in classification is sure to encourage. After all, deer spread disease, their population is rapidly growing, their distribution broadening and their impact increasing. A high cost is borne by the environment and agriculture to provide for the entertainment for a small number of politically maligned, deliberately ineffectual sportsmen. A change in status will allow the use of technologies (e.g. drones, night vision, etc.), remove bag limits and seasons, shooting from vehicles, the use of spotlights and perhaps baiting. Really, change is well overdue.

Cheers,

Maddog.

[newhue]

yep sure are due for a change. And this is not a go at you maddog.

I keep communing back to genetic engineering, release a few modified males and over time only males are born so the bread eventually die out. Cheap, non invasive, directly targeted at specific specie, warm and fuzzy, and allows recreation shooting to adapt, horse lovers to adapt, tourist/romance industry to adapt.....but no. Not on my watch. I wish humans really had a good honest realistic look at themselves. So focused on being politically correct and all to everyone the weeds and feral animals will live happily ever after. The magic baits, just like humans magic pill will save us all from our ills. Why is it ok to be eaten from the inside out and die? And whatever else goes down with it is accepted as collateral. But to allow a controlled event in a NP to cull ferals, something NP's could actually make a dollar from; plus keep a sector of the community happy, and commerce ticking, too far a head stretch for the tree huggers concerned about the horses wrecking their beloved stomping ground. To think a chopper at $10 000 for the week only does clean kills is folly. I am not a shooter, but to be honest, all the ones I have met over the years take their sport way more seriously than I ever thought they did or would.

lastly, just spent a weekend end with several dads and our sons. The sons that got everything they wanted, their dads tried to be everything to them, had the kids with no respect, discipline, appreciation, or thought for nothing else then themselves. Society is no different. Politicians try and be every thing to everyone...and we get what we get.

[maddog]

G’day Newhue,

Genetic engineering sounds speculative and expensive. Are there any examples of such a strategy successfully being used to control deer or similar pest species?

On political correctness, and in relation to weeds and pests, the ‘politically correct’ view is that all foreigners need to be controlled or removed altogether (which is the predominant theme of this thread). Those more well informed, often argue that integration is possible, in some cases desirable, and each case must be determined on its own merits.

If we assume that there is sound justification for culling, in regard to ad-hoc shooting it has been clearly demonstrated that such a method has little, if any, impact on populations - leaving such an approach struggling for acceptance as an archaic indulgence, a particularly repugnant one where the cost is borne by others (particularly the case with deer).

By way of contrast, great progress is being made with other approaches. Vermin have been successfully removed from some island habitats by baiting (though it should be recognised there have been some unfortunate unintended consequences of this success unrelated to the use of the baits). Probably the most exciting recent development is our ability to detect species using drones (UAVs) carrying remote sensing instruments. Impossibly cryptic species can now be easily located using such technologies. Once located culling is relatively straightforward matter. At this point in time the range of the UAVs is the limiting factor, and many of these platforms are toys, but we can expect this this to change quite quickly. as military technologies are adapted for use in pest animal control.

Cheers,

Maddog.

[newhue]

yep well known and reports of feral control on islands, the Kiwi's are very good at it. But they are islands, usually fairly small, and much easier to work with and study. Generic modification expansive, has anyone calculated the cumulative cost of feral animals. Perhaps we start with the rabbit, at least that one effects human's yields so they may be interested in doing so. As for the cost on nature from a native animals perspective us humans will never ever know. But I'd say us humans are up there way in front of cane toads, cats, pigs, horses etc. However to make feral animal eradication a priority in this country is perhaps the least us humans can do for the biodiversity of flora and fauna in this country. Just one island in the middle of a big blue planet.

[sambar358]

Some interesting additions since my last visit. The NSW Parks supervised pest culling programs using SSAA hunters has been a failure mainly from the POV of the "supervised" bit. I've taken a few non-hunters on sambar stalking jaunts just to show them some country and maybe a deer and invariably they are noisy, keep falling over, can't handle the country and spook everything within earshot. The NSW programs have failed due to this...NSW Parks staffers being required to accompany the hunters as has the Vic program under similar guidelines in the Bogong unit of the Vic ANP. It's seriously difficult to bush stalk sambar alone and far more-so when accompanied especially by someone who probably doesn't really want to be there anyway. While these programs may be worth having a go at, all the compliance requirements hardly make them equate to recreational hunting as it is normally conducted. And of course in Vic we have had free-go totally unsupervised recreational deer hunting in most units of the Alpine National Park since the Park was declared around 30 years ago......and I expect the status quo to remain on that.

Maybe some people are under-estimating the number and range of the sambar in particular......we are not talking a few 100 animals living in the odd patch of bush here and there.....if it was only that then eradication may be possible. What we have with the sambar in particular is half a state full of them.....draw a line from Melbourne to the Murray then go all the way east to the NSW border and include all the coast from the Prom to the far east. Virtually all the country that has some form of scrub, bush or forest cover will have deer in it these days. There at least 100's of thousands of them if not millions.....sambar are extremely adaptive and will do just as well in the dry harsh coastal t-tree swamps to our alpine areas above 1400m and everywhere else in between. They will eat anything that's available including gum leaves......and even in severe drought years the sambar thrive. People talking about eradication or even some measure of control over their entire range have no understanding of the deer.......essentially they are now unstoppable !

Talking about drones, genetic modification, pro-shooters with NV, aerial culling, large-scale poisoning to rid us of all the deer is just that.....talk....and while there is a place for pro-shooters with their stealthy gear addressing localised deer problems such as animals encroaching on crops, vineyards or orchards etc. application of this sort of a strategy state-wide is simply not affordable and is totally unachievable at the level that would be needed to make any sort of difference even in some areas.....for a short time. What we have in the sambar is an animal that is genetically programmed to be hunted by the tiger.....they are extremely wary, alert and very well-equipped to avoid danger.....they do not stand around to be mowed-down like a mob of feral goats.

I'm a recreational deer hunter.....I am not a deer culler for the government and neither are the other 36,000 licenced Victorian deer hunters. Shooting a deer is only part of the reason that I go hunting. Like the rest of us I enjoy the total outdoor experience, exploring new country, observing all things in the natural world and at times testing myself by going into remote and untracked country.....drawn there by the deer of course but not "just" by them. So if I need some venison for the freezer or see a nice trophy stag then I might decide to take an animal but that is my choice and I am not compelled to do that as a major part of my ethics as a hunter is to value and respect the animal and not just shoot and leave it to rot......that is what culling does ! So when I shoot one I "lump the meat" and with a sambar that can weigh up to 300 kgs this can be a significant effort requiring a number of trips often over 2 days. Most deer hunters would share this viewpoint I would think......shooting one is really the easy bit.

But collectively we as licenced deer hunters in Vic annually account for 60,000+ deer.....and I challenge anyone to argue effectively that this is not a fair pile of deer that would otherwise not be taken. By comparison the annual pro-shooter deer take is a very small fraction of the recreational harvest and mostly concentrated around the NE of Melbourne and the leafy semi-rural areas not open to recreational hunting. The normal modus-operandi of the pro-shooter is shooting at night using a night vision scope mounted on a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a silencer and targeting deer coming-in to private land to feed on a crop, orchard or vineyard. Effective tactics certainly to address localised problems on private land for a short time (at significant cost to the land owner) but this is not an applicable technique to apply state-wide across normal forested deer range if the government had to foot the bill.

But it'll be interesting to see where all this current deer hysteria leads.......probably nothing beyond the current hand-wringing and talk-fests I suspect. The reality is that "the horse has bolted" with the deer and the sambar in particular and the government could literally throw its entire annual budget at the deer forever and most likely not make even a dent in them state-wide. To date Australia has never been able to address any introduced feral animal, fish, insect and plant species to any degree at all......and the deer will be no different.....but time will tell I guess. Cheers

s358

[Xplora]

The NSW programs have failed due to this...NSW Parks staffers accompanying the hunters ....as has the Vic program under similar guidelines in the Bogong unit of the Vic ANP. It's seriously difficult to bush stalk sambar alone and far more-so when accompanied especially by someone who probably doesn't really want to be there anyway.

I am not sure what happens in the NSW culls but for the Bogong 'control' the hunters are go out in pairs and only have radio communication with the Parks person supervising. They have done more night shoots and are now using night vision which is more successful. The problem with the lack of numbers in this cull is certainly not the noisy non-hunter and more to do with the terrain and the lack of experience in many of the recreational hunters being utilised. It is there stumbling possibly that scares the prey. I know it does not help they are in pairs but there needs to be some aspect of safety in an operation using up to 12 hunters at any time. Things have gone very quiet with this operation with no culls for 5 months or more but their tally is still very poor. Weather has not been great for it but there are plenty of deer down low. My partner and I are going to do a deer butchering course next week and maybe we will get in on the action. I doubt I would have a significant impact on the numbers though and my freezer space is limited. Here is a short article from the Weekly Times which relates to the topic.
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/news/n ... a1ec63af0e
I know 1080 has been discussed and Sambar is concerned about the by-kill but my reading on that topic shows most native animals have a natural tolerance to it and birds digestion process seems to leave them unaffected. I agree with S358 that there is no way to eradicate deer now but more drastic measures will have an impact over time. Rabbits are a good example of how control measures have reduced impact. Yes there are rabbits but not in the numbers previous. This has however impacted one Australian company and maybe a few fast food outlets. Acubra is having trouble with rabbit pelt supply to make hats. KFC now has to put chicken in their nuggets.

[sambar358]

Hey Xplora....I was up in your patch of the woods all this past week and certainly its been a rough winter with all the rain and bleak weather.....never seen the country so wet still. Drove up to the BHP gate on Tuesday and it was positively bleak up there and icy cold still. As you said....plenty of deer still down low and massive amounts of sign in all the gullies I looked in above the Highway up your end.

Sambar venison is a nice lean meat and very healthy eating.....you obviously have them right on your doorstep (probably literally) and with the price of beef and lamb these days tipping a good handy chewer over now and again would supplement the larder nicely and be doing a bit to keep the deer-menace at bay as well. If you can dress-out a lamb or a steer you can do a sambar......they all look the same with their clothes off. Being lean it tends to dry out if over-cooked.....do the roasts in an oven bag, BBQ the fillet and steak cuts on a very hot plate or pan just a minute or two each side, slow-cookers and camp oven venison stews come-up a treat and the mince makes great pies and sausage rolls.....and of course everyone loves my chunky venison snags ! It's just another meat-beast really......pick a nice young one, kill it cleanly and keep the meat clean and cool while hanging for a week or so.....then enjoy.

On the Parks supervised culls......I'm pretty sure the NSW set-up was a close supervised hunt with a Parks staffer actually with the hunter or a group so essentially a program set-up to fail from the start there which it did. And a general suspicion and mistrust of hunters as well I suspect as of course NSW has no history of legal hunting on public land in that state at all and even today under the DPI management of public land hunting it's all very structured with forests needing to be booked on-line, lots of forests not in the system and over-all a very cumbersome system to manage....but better than nothing at all or what was the case in the past. Most NSW deer hunters view Victoria as the shining light.....free access to state forests for deer hunting year-round and to much of the ANP and some other Parks with the only compliance being having a Vic Game Licence endorsed for deer. Pick a spot that's legal, camp where you like, stay as long as you like and shoot as many as you like....."Victoria : The Place to Be !"

The Bogong cull has certainly given all involved a good idea of what they are really up against though......lots of man-hours spent and plenty of expenditure by Parks for not a very significant outcome in regards to dead sambar. Some of the failure could be attributed to the inexperience of many of the hunters involved & some may have seen this program as a good way to get a few "easy and uneducated" sambar that have never been hunted before.....but quickly learnt that there are few "easy" sambar in the bush. I would expect an injection of some very experienced and skilled sambar hunters hunting solo at times that suited them (and in favourable conditions and localities) would have had a better outcome number-wise. The NV usage seems to have been moderately successful though but it obviously has its limitations as to where it can be used and the high cost of current gen. NV equipment is also significant. I think if Parks did the numbers on the Bogong cull to this stage the per-animal cost would be quite high....likely $1000+......which is really unsustainable if the Parks Vic budget has to absorb this cost to cull low numbers of deer which are very quickly replaced from the surrounding bush anyway . Balance this against the annual recreational take of 60,000+ animals (mostly sambar) which is currently being achieved by recreational hunters......for free ! Interesting times indeed. Cheers

s358

[newhue]

hmm, I must just be a dreamer. If there is a will there is a solution. The politicians portray to our neighbours we a peaceful nation supposedly; but to spend 130 billion on weapons isn't going to stop China, Korea, or the Russians. And I for one would be a confused neighbour. It will however make Amercrca happy and I wonder how long Australia has to tied by the umbilical chord because we fault ALONG SIDE them in WW2. I guess we spend our money on whats important. NZ also fought along side and seems to be a much better role model, neither concerned with war or US deals. Just say we worked hard on sorting genetic modification for feral animal control, we might, just have something very special to export to the world. Something far more important to humans survival on Earth than any weapon.

[Xplora]

Newhue, reading your comment I thought for a moment you had posted it on the wrong topic. The walk against war topic is one down but since it is here you cannot compare NZ to us. They have 2 boats and I think as many airplanes. Their role is one of aid globally but during the big wars they had a great deal more and did more as well. You should visit their aircraft museums. They could not afford a fighting airforce so they sold it. The Australian Navy bought their little jets. NZ relies on its allies for defence and we would be there for them should they be threatened as would the US.
Genetic modification would take many years to perfect and then many more to have any effect on these out of control feral animals. Solutions need to be long and short term so working on it now is not stupid but we need more happening now.

Sambar - we both have eaten venison before and did not like it but that was when it was prepared by others. Recently we used some taken locally and cooked it ourselves. The taste was not bad and we thought it could work for us. I cook kangaroo in an oven bag as well because it is so lean. My partner does not like blood in her steaks so that may not be an option for the BBQ. I read recently about an idea of a local man to set up an abattoir for deer to encourage people to rid the area of them and at the same time not waste their meat. Of course the idea was met with the ADA's spokesman's comment of 'as long as it is strictly controlled' meaning don't get rid of too many because it would affect our sport and maybe membership. I am glad you have stated deer numbers are out of control and I agree there could be a million or more. 60000 shot a year seems to have very little affect on their omnipresence so if the population was less than the estimated 300000 then we would be seeing less in the bush instead of more and more often. Personally I would be more happy to see the kill numbers around 300000 each year regardless of the method and a combination of methods is probably the best way forward. Recreational hunters want more area opened up for them and say that will help reduce the numbers. That has as much credibility as the cattlemen saying they care for the High Country and 'grazing reduces blazing'. They are all self serving statements with do not hold water. It is hard to lug your trophy or meat out and that is part of the challenge and in itself is a reward. The evidence is that there are so many deer in the areas hunters are allowed to shoot that they really should be taking twice the number stated instead they are not concerned about controlling the species and are very selective about their kill. You have said so yourself. A young one for meat and then of course trophy. All the others can stay as they have no value and they will then continue to breed more meat and trophies. The only people who shoot deer for control are the authorities or those working for them and that is not working either. If something does not work and you continue to do it in the hope that it just may one day then I would say that concept is slightly insane. 'Lets do more of something that does not work' is even worse.

[newhue]

Explora, just quickly as I don't wish to change the topic. Some parts that jumped out at me, New Zealand ONCE had an army AS THEY COULD NOT AFFORD IT. Their role is one of AID these days. I've been to the museum, and also witnessed their latest full very cutting edge French helicopters they now have at war birds over wanaka this year. Seems the Kiwi's know who they are and where they are going as the helicopters are converted for Aid work more than war. I think we are very much like NZ, but not as smart. And I'm not sure we can afford 130 billion either, but I am confident it can improve a lot of issues within Australia.
I have dated NZ girls, have some good friends there, and been there many times now; when you hang out with them socially they almost always feel about Australia as Australians often do Americans. Happy to know us but get tired of being bullied. Australia is not a super power down here no matter how much we want to be, nor how much the yanks want us to be so they can use our lands and sell us stuff for their benefit. We should not even start to think we are, just look at China and Nth Korea. Numbers alone they can over run us like ants. America wold be a fool to push China around, but a bully can't help themselves and eventually they will try. And sadly we will be dragged into it.

Australia is a small crack creative tallented bunch, effective at being so and should focus on that. We have proven that time and time again in war. You hear what does it mean to be Australian? Perhaps we should see our unique skills as part of being Australian in our approach to the global economy. Not being some little jerk hanging around the bully saying "yeh thats right" every time he speaks or wants money. It was a huge step of NZ to say no America, but they survived and I'm sure we can too.
Yes genetic engineering is not going to happen tomorrow, but a start has been made as we do it in farming already to a degree, we just need to perfect it and be the first to do it well. I'd rather we spend a % of 130 billion on equipment for Aid work and protecting our shores better from smugglers of all types, and the rest go to bettering Australia. Not for-filing some contract we signed with the yanks to buy their weapons.

Perhaps in time heat seeking poisonous darts from clones is where we need to go in regards to ferals, well for all but those dam deer by the sounds of it.

[Xplora]

I apologise to all for encouraging this off topic discussion and will not contine it from now. Discussion regarding war, defence, foreign policy or armament procurement should be directed to the appropriate topic or forum. This is not it. Very sorry to kick the soap box away but if I did not then the moderators would.

[newhue]

Now now explora, we have a huge problem with feral animals wrecking the landscape and all things relate to the problem. Funding for a solution is one. Its clear from this thread current practices have limited effect, can be costly, and usually local. The animals are very good at surviving but when they die a lonesome frozen death few care, however misplace a bullet, or poison them and manner bleeding-hearts. This is not to say we abandon them, but we need more approaches.
Had lunch yesterday with the bro in law, which, perhaps is another part of the problem. He "junk" files any constitute that emails him a hair brain idea. Doesn't give it a second thought as he see it as the citizen thinks they know more then him and are not main stream. Now if a politician only listens to his in-house advisers, or people he feels have merit, than maybe they are just as big a part of the problem as is funding. All related, so no don't apologise, be proud for digging deeper.

[Mark F]

It sounds like Victoria may finally start to do something about feral horses. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-29/victorian-brumbies-invasive-pest-or-part-of-our-heritage/8218260

[Xplora]

A decision by April?? Lets hope they can do it. PV know what has to be done and are just going through the process to appease these simple and narrow minded people. There is also little point arguing with these people as they will not see logic.