Thread: Deer Population Growth

Originally Posted by STC

Totally understand where you are coming from.

However If one choses to believe the "there are too many deer" narrative there essentially are 2 options: share the spots with "too many deer" and accept that that will not the case for long or give in to the 1080/pest eradication propaganda that some actors are pushing for in this thread.

I had agreed to numbers to be taken and frequency with both the two blocks involved - and in both cases the cocky did not give out access - if I introduced other hunters to a landowner who is then happy to let them thru well and good - another thing is cockys now are shit scared of HSE and possible repercussions for them should an accident occur - and many have no lack of hunters themselves - access has always been the hard one - but just a point on 1080 and deer DOC policy does not allow deliberate targeting of deer with 1080 and long may that continue - but some of the other agencys like Regional Councils well they sacary

Originally Posted by STC

Totally understand where you are coming from.

However If one choses to believe the "there are too many deer" narrative there essentially are 2 options: share the spots with "too many deer" and accept that that will not the case for long or give in to the 1080/pest eradication propaganda that some actors are pushing for in this thread.

No offence intended whatsoever but I think this is a very naive view.

The property I was referring to above is adjacent to my permissions. I sit on the boundary and look out over this neighbouring station. I have no rights on that property. The only way the deer could ever be controlled on there would be with helicopter shooting. And in time I am quite sure that is what will happen.

Neither you and your mates nor anyone else on foot would make the slightest bit of difference, such is the terrain.

I know how many deer are getting shot in helicopter culls in that part of the world, and if I said it here, you wouldn’t believe me.

This has got bugger all to do with my “secret spots”. I am just one of several guys that shoot the adjacent farms on a regular basis. There’s nothing secret about it whatsoever.

The way I interpret your response is that there is a hefty dose of envy, which is getting in the way of understanding the practical realities. Like I say I do not mean to offend but sometimes some attitude adjustment needs to happen to be able to see a problem for what it really is.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

No offence intended whatsoever but I think this is a very naive view.

The property I was referring to above is adjacent to my permissions. I sit on the boundary and look out over this neighbouring station. I have no rights on that property. The only way the deer could ever be controlled on there would be with helicopter shooting. And in time I am quite sure that is what will happen.

Neither you and your mates nor anyone else on foot would make the slightest bit of difference, such is the terrain.

I know how many deer are getting shot in helicopter culls in that part of the world, and if I said it here, you wouldn’t believe me.

This has got bugger all to do with my “secret spots”. I am just one of several guys that shoot the adjacent farms on a regular basis. There’s nothing secret about it whatsoever.

The way I interpret your response is that there is a hefty dose of envy, which is getting in the way of understanding the practical realities. Like I say I do not mean to offend but sometimes some attitude adjustment needs to happen to be able to see a problem for what it really is.

Please keep your projections to your self, and also understand that my remark was not necessarily aimed directly at you, each and every one will have their reasons, some of them even good reasons.

I do not mind people keeping their secret spots. On the contrary. But there are plenty of new hunters that are struggling to get their freezer filled. Bullshitting about how deer numbers are "exploding" (they are not in many places), does not help.

I also do not necessarily have problems with helicopter operations, as long as the meat is used, on the contrary.

Nearly all land can be made accessible if there is a desire to do so. Ask the early settlers, Sadly we have adopted an attitude of finding excuses not to do something instead of getting on with it.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

No offence intended whatsoever but I think this is a very naive view....

The way I interpret your response is that there is a hefty dose of envy, which is getting in the way of understanding the practical realities. Like I say I do not mean to offend but sometimes some attitude adjustment needs to happen to be able to see a problem for what it really is.

I don't think it was said with envy, well not unhealthy envy at least.

I for one know of places where I can reliably shoot deer on public land, but its a two hour drive from home ($100 of diesel and RUC's these days) and a four hour hike. There's also no sign of there being too many deer so I'm only shooting what I can carry (1-2 deer) I'd by lying if I didn't say I wasn't jealous of hunters who know of (or have private access to) area's where they see herds of deer and perhaps have easier access. I can also accept thought that knowledge like that comes from years of hunting.

I think there could be a more balanced approach though such as an "adopt a hunter" programme through NZDA's, where seasoned hunters commit to taking a junior hunter out to an area with too many hinds for culling and/or meat harvesting purposes. The junior hunter would have already demonstrated a level of commitment through NZDA membership (maybe having done the HUNTs course as well) which reduces the chance of an area being overrun by people. I know this already happens informally to an extent but there's no formal system or organised hunts like this that I know of (North Canterbury DA is my branch).

Some good information on how that works here too.

Key piece of information in there is the quality of deer is at a maximum when the population is at a minimum.

https://www.msudeer.msstate.edu/popu...cs-of-deer.php

This second page talks about habitat carrying capacity. That's a metric I've often thought we are missing in NZ (unless I've missed it), i.e. how many deer (or Tahr, pigs etc etc) can a specific area hold that will produce high quality animals and minimal damage to the environment. Reckon it's just pretty chaotic here in NZ. It could be useful knowing we need to take ~600 deer from the southern Ruahines in the next year for example, and then hunters got to work doing that.

https://www.msudeer.msstate.edu/deer...g-capacity.php

Good share

Great to see some people agreeing we have a problem that is growing rapidly. Hopefully, this means that there will be better acceptance when landowners, regional councils, and public land administrators start to better fund the management of deer numbers in NZ.

WARO is happening but in low numbers and mainly in the easier country (mainly private). So this will have little impact on what people are seeing out there.

The most efficient times to manage hinds is ALWAYS, this is inclusive of when in late pregnancy and when fawns are "at foot" (cull the fawn too). The mindset of not shooting them while pregnant could be considered short-sighted and only make the problem worse than the direction it is currently headed.

We are at a stage where only shooting enough that you can carry, isn't enough to help the balance between numbers and forest preservation, and of course, the overall quality of stags and bucks as already stated.

The NZDA initiatives of working with DOC to take group hunts into special landing zones in high population areas is great. It can cream off good numbers of animals.
The branches that do it often subsidise the costs. Everyone benefits.

Originally Posted by Tahr

The NZDA initiatives of working with DOC to take group hunts into special landing zones in high population areas is great. It can cream off good numbers of animals.
The branches that do it often subsidise the costs. Everyone benefits.

Also being nzda members reduces the risk of there being "fuckwits". And there is insurance.

Win-Win for every party.

"Also being nzda members reduces the risk of there being "fuckwits". Now there's a naive statement if ever there was. Being a member of NZDA or SCI doesn't negate the 'fuckfuck' element in society.

Originally Posted by STC

Also being nzda members reduces the risk of there being "fuckwits". And there is insurance.

Win-Win for every party.

Classic, haven't laughed that hard for a long time

From my experience farmers severely underestimate how many deer graze on their properties, they don’t realise that 95% of them are coming out after dark, spending all night grazing and then disappearing back into the bush before first light. For every 3-6 deer grazing it’s the equivalent of 1 heifer, I do wonder if farmers realised it was actually hitting their bottom line they might be more willing to let hunters on their property.

Deer getting like the rabbit problem.For decades they've used rabbit boards,large poisning operations.Dropped 1000s of tons of poison carrots.Virus placements.Rabbit still here in the millions.

Originally Posted by Trout

Deer getting like the rabbit problem.For decades they've used rabbit boards,large poisning operations.Dropped 1000s of tons of poison carrots.Virus placements.Rabbit still here in the millions.

Rabbit eradication is impossible. Sustained control is necessary to manage impacts on values, economic or other. Sustained means forever. There will be rabbits and there will be rabbit control forever. You should not expect otherwise.

Originally Posted by Tahr

The NZDA initiatives of working with DOC to take group hunts into special landing zones in high population areas is great. It can cream off good numbers of animals.
The branches that do it often subsidise the costs. Everyone benefits.

Public DOC land, fine.

Private land? Not so straightforward.

Take a look at the current economic situation. Drystock and honey are under massive pressure. Farm input and application costs have skyrocketed. Interest rates are through the roof. Margins have evaporated and many farms across the country will fail to turn a profit this year and probably next. Many discretionary development projects are on hold, as there is a lot of routine maintenance like fencing. All this stuff you know better than I do of course.

For a private landowner with a significant pest ungulate problem, the only realistic way to make a tangible difference quickly is to bring in professionals. Helicopters or maybe an outfit like Jason Hart’s BCL. But with operating cash under such pressure at the moment, many cockies are turning a blind eye to their problem in the hope that they can deal with it another time. Unfortunately they just can’t afford it right now.

It’s no surprise that so many landowners looking at the value of their properties and how to realise that value to the benefit of themselves and their heirs, are looking into carbon & trees. For a lot of these guys, they just can’t see a way out other than trees.

There are heli culling operations on the west side of the central plateau that are killing >1,000 deer in just a few hours flying time. The GoPro footage is hard to get your head around. I found it very hard to believe the numbers I was being told until I’d seen it. A game strictly for the professionals. But at significant cost to the farmer of course.

To some this appears to be whingeing and moaning, I guess you have to be living in some kind of isolated bubble outside of reality to interpret the problem like that.

A good while ago on this forum - 2-3 years? - someone posted a DOC document that discussed the challenges of controlling ungulates across the central North Island, recognising how broken up the public land is, i.e. how much of the public land is in the form of small blocks landlocked by private land, and how difficult it is to corral private landowners into a concerted regional action plan. I’d love it if we could have another look at that but I’ve not been able to find it. If you know what I’m talking about please provide a link if you’ve got one.

From my experience in the back blocks, it’s hard enough to get neighbours to agree where to place hives, to share boundary fence costs or to sign off on a helicopter cull (you have to have the permission of your neighbours). Quite a lot of the time you’d actually be not that far off the mark believing that a lot of these valleys are in a persistent state of low-level war with one another.

The conversations I’ve had about this problem suggest that if and when the dry stock schedules and other revenue streams like honey return to where they were a few years ago, then some serious dollars will be spent on helicopters. If the venison price was to return to historic highs, be it for human consumption grade or pet food, then some of the venison would be recovered. But at the moment with the MPI regulations as they are they can’t even make it pay for pet food.

It’s a multifaceted problem that’s going to require money and time. In the CNI, the response will be haphazard because some will have both and some will have little of either. Outside of some spectacular local reductions in population through the concerted use of helicopters, I don’t see the problem going away any time soon.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

with the MPI regulations as they are they can’t even make it pay...

Seems to me these MPI fellas hold at least some of the keys to this problem? And also hold the keys to farm profitability, at least for many smaller livestock farmers?
But maybe not, just a slightly educated guess.