Your too young to retire!!!:)
Printable View
condolence to you offline
Did the 58 000 moa eat the same amount as the deer? Between 1945 and 1955 around 300 000 deer were shot in New Zealand. That's just shot, not deer alive in the bush still eating. In 1956 alone 91 000 were shot.
I think just the ones shot would have eaten a fucking lot trees more than the moa did. I there was / is no way for the bush to cope.
That's why the deer cullers, Forest Service and now DoC try to control deer and possum. And goat, mustelids and rats etc.
"The deer very nicely fill the void left by the moa." Yeah, tens of thousands of times over.
Just to give the North Island guys a bit of perspective, we dont do little wee blocks of bush like they do up north as that is not how you exterminate species and that is the goal here in the top of the south make no mistake about that.
Ruahines 94,000 hectares
Kawekas 68,000 hectares
Here is the areas in hectares aerially dropped ( Just in the top of the south)with 1080 with no hand laid or brodi or anything else added to the numbers.
Done since August. All in Hectares.
32,036
4,077
87,166
2,848
Completed by the middle of this month.
209,821
17,154
It is all there in the poison summary if you would like to check my numbers they are not made up or exaggerated.
There are single operations done here that cover more area than all of the Ruahines and Kawekas combined and they are back to do it again as soon as possible.
Id say a few of you would be upset if they carpet bombed the entire Ruahines and Kawekas and also your private land bordering (cos they are good like that :thumbsup:) in one go with no repellant.
Kahurangi national park 452,000 hectares, the whole lot will be done.
1,000,000 hectares of 1080 dropped for Battle for the birds.
You mean to deal to the birds?
You hit the nail squarely on the head rite there (I THINK) so you are speculating on every front so go back & crawl under your little crown fern & have a real long study up on proven facts if they exist about what animals ate & how much they consumed on there daily diet 500-1000 years ago vs what animals eat now how many there are & report back with some hard evidence ...my lance wood is a proven fact moas ate them....they evolved :)
Deer. Tho the rock wren and kea will get absolutely hammered also.
It doesnt help when your local council wants deer exterminated :(
http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...te-deer-24035/
My MOA cuts the hectare section I have in an hour and a half but when it's real thick it can take longer. That changes based on the season.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
The only way DOC will "manage" deer is if they can get away with it politically and make money. They do it at the moment with trout which are an ecologically invasive species. Just ask a freshwater ecologist.
Hypocritical that's for sure all the red tape the rma comes up with & then heres f&g keeping the rivers well stocked with trout lol...carnage but it pay$
DOC shouldn't be managing deer or introduced species now that the Game Council has been formed. I think a lot more good would come from the Game Council as they have interest in both the animals and the environment, DOC mostly want them dead.
I personally visit our back country for the animals, for me the birds are a added bonus. But I wouldn't walk into far away places to watch birds, deer etc are my draw card. If the Game Council aren't going to get full reins on the management of our game animals the government needs to address the reason and if that means taking deer etc off the pest list then they need to do just that.
My understanding is that there is a patent on the deer repellent formula, which means it cannot be added to the baits during production. These normal baits have to be shipped to a warehouse, spread out, then sprayed with the deer repellent. This adds a lot of money to the production of 'deer repellent' baits. I don't think the patent will be lifted any time soon either. This means that the repellent can wash off in wet conditions and doesn't last as long as it otherwise would. From what I can gather it does work. There seems to be a lot of stuff said on the issue of 1080, a lot of it seems to be people thinking with their emotions rather than logic, which makes arguing difficult and seems almost impossible to get a point across in most situations. Deer need controlling, it's well understood the damages they can do when they reach high numbers. I've definitely seen some areas that could do with a few less deer, not only for the bush but for the animals themselves being in such high numbers didn't seem to be getting the feed they need. Deer evolved in an ecosystem which contained predators which kept the population healthy, which is something that is largely missing from the one they occupy here. There is a paper by Dave Forsyth where he looks at impacts of deer and Moa on New Zealand ecosystems which would be worth a read for anyone that's interested. Doc don't use 1080 to control deer, the deaths are by-kill from operations targeting introduced predators.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Without doing any proper research, (shoot me down right now), I suggest that deer , or at least the majority of NZ deer, did indeed evolve in an ecosystem without any real predators other than man. The wolves and bears were long since wiped out in most of the European/uk habitats that our "wild" deer are decended from.
In high population areas I have often (private property) found dead old hinds that didnt make the winter threw and died of starvation......I shot one that was obviously not doing well once...she was a massive bodyed hind but skinny as at the end of summer(should be fat) she had lost most of her front teeth and the molars were literally worn to the gum...there is a photo of the jaw I posted on here somewhere but I lost it in a computer malfuction.
Even her well aged backsteaks were inedible to my palate......the whole animal went into sausages and even those were pretty average at best.
I would hazard a guess thst deer aint 'evolved' to shit here, its only been close to 180 years since they arrived. They are however very adaptable.
evolution takes place over hundreds of thousands of years minimum. The predators that were wiped out (wolves and bears) were only lost in the last few hundred years.Before that they co existed for hundreds of thousands if not millions of years That said we have to include ourselves as major predators of deer as we have been hunting them ever since we first picked up a spear.
Usually, but not always:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
https://youtu.be/plVk4NVIUh8
Nice try: if that were the case, we wouldn't have a "theory of evolution" - which had to come from relatively short (in evolution terms) observations.
Refer: Evolution World Tour: Galápagos Islands, Ecuador | Evotourism | Smithsonian
David Attenborough has some very interesting documentaries on this - great for an rainy afternoon when you would rather be hunting.
The Galapagos are very similar to New Zealand in their remoteness: an ideal evolutionary pond.
Did'nt do the Dodo much good did it! Anyway, who wants to live their life in Galapagos? (apart from hermits)
Gone. Moa--Gone, mostly burnt and eaten.
Haast Eagle etc etc -gone.
Place would be bloody boring without deer ,tahr, chamois, pigs trout, pheasnats, quail, Canada geese and mallard ducks :)
Finches and Tortoises have been observed to be different on different Islands/niches. We havent observed that change, only noted and theorised their differences and why they may have occured .
Talking about evolution is a bit like talking about religon and 1080. You can have opposing veiws and each side know they are right. :D
Well, the Maori's liked hunting and eating Moa's.
Haast Eagle then had no tucker. He died out. Most lime / calcium fertilizer for the early settlers came from the vast piles of moa bones near Waitaki river mouth.
I like hunting and eating introduced game animals, fish and birds. Therefore I don't like chemicals that hurt these.
I don't want to end up subsisting on processed krill and insects either, for that matter. Leave that sort of tucker to the PC'ers and the Twig and Tweet brigade I reckon.
DoC and councils would do better to be working at enhancing game animal habitats than some of their other wasteful activities. eg, leaving blown down Rimu forests / trees to rot instead of logging salvaging them. And- Perhaps the dead mass stranded pilot whales could have been salvaged and rendered for pet food and oil instead of being left to rot ffs!
Probably. we know what happened to them too eh :) A sort of example of how humans evolve ---
Time horizon is a lot shorter than normal: check out some articles. Arguing semantics doesn't help and yes - each side will argue they are right :D
Deer are here to stay (hopefully...) recognition as an asset (think Fiordland Wapiti Foundation) is more helpful than scorched earth.
Pretty sure I read in NZ geo that some old Scottish pioneer shot the last of the Haast eagles cos he got hungry
Maybe Pengy, cos he couldn't find a Moa to eat! That Scotty must have been bloody delusional. I bet Eagles don't taste like porridge OR haggis.
Don't no what the big deal is how hard can it be to put deer of from eating it , just tip some of that lion red piss on it deer won't go near it