probably didnt provide enough info in my post should have added some will just say "nah not going there it gets hammered with 1080" even long after the safe to harvest date...which gives the population a chance to bounce back.
used to hunt straight after the drops with a young fella ...... it was always treated as a training exercise for him....to hone his skills if we come across a sick deer we had already preplanned thats all we would shoot to put it out of its misery. healthy looking deer we would leave for the future......having said that i do know of a DOC ranger who was harvesting meat during the no harvest period (not for research either)
I wont worry too much about waiting for the full ""īts all clear"date after a 1080 drop. Deer dont take well to 1080 at all, after eating a small dose they dead within a short period take a day or 3. After heavy rain, esp after couple of times and a month or so any deer looking ok will so unlikely have 1080 posioning, little alone enough to harm you i be happy to harvest and eat with no problem .
That latest Landcare research study is the most properganda BS i have seen written in a long time.
Clearly trying to say theres quote ""no evidence of even short term negative effects of aerial 1080 ops on numbers of deer encounters and deer seen"" unquote.
Reading it you nearly believe 1080 actually increases the amount of deer(must somehow produce deer out of thin air)
This is of cause from people that are looking for rats and birds, and record encounters of deer. If a bush moves and they hear a noise in the scrub it prob is a deer so it gets recorded. One deer prob gets seen 10 times from different people, gets recorded as ten instead of one.
Its a joke, its written to con the pro 1080 and the brainless that 1080 is doing nothing to deer numbers, but, shit, it increasing them at worst haha.
Shame on who wrote that BS, its bias, its BS and prob twisted to suit the pro 1080 band wagon.
Bookmarks