Thread: Deer repellant..Crock of crap

Always heard deer repellant on 1080 was crap and doesnt work that well. Someone i know went for a walk up the Cobb Valley after the 1080 drop(deer repellant used they say) and found 3 dead carcasses of fallow. Havnt seen him for awhile and he was up there 3 weeks after the drop. Very little sign of deer aroundand if he came across 3 there be shit lots more but numbers were low . esp for fallow after the first drop last year. Sad story

Yes Deer Repellant was designed by fuckwits to help the brown nose brigade brainwash the public.....

I understand the repellant used is based on pigs blood.

Cheers
Pete

my deer repellent is rexona,works every time.

Originally Posted by marky123

my deer repellent is rexona,works every time.

Works the same on the babes too aye.

Cheers
Pete

really, having been in an area where it was used i can confirm

1, yes there was deaths,
2 the death level was no where near that of non deer repellant areas

Its not like the bates run away when a deer comes near or has a sign sayinmg "dont eat me"

If it was a choice i would say deer repellant every time

amazing how all of a sudden 3 dead deer equals it dosent work

Hamish

Originally Posted by HNTMAD

really, having been in an area where it was used i can confirm

1, yes there was deaths,
2 the death level was no where near that of non deer repellant areas

Its not like the bates run away when a deer comes near or has a sign sayinmg "dont eat me"

If it was a choice i would say deer repellant every time

amazing how all of a sudden 3 dead deer equals it dosent work

Hamish

Thats all good to say, but the fact is the fallow up the Cobb were hit very hard after the first drop, from what i saw of sign when i was up there and many accounts of other hunters backed by the local DOC worker.
With animal numbers already low ,after that second drop for someone to find 3 deer carcasses says something.
By all accounts its hard enough to find anything dead in the bush after a drop, and to find 3 deer dead in a 2km radius suggests that thats just the tip of the iceberg and with low numbers suggests a good percentage was hit.
Says something about the so called repellant to me, it doesnt work very well and if you saying it works far better than without then straight 1080 must be killing a massive amount of deer, esp fallow as they tend to be grazers and the smaller body weight they dont take to it well v a red(not that they take to it well either).
Im not a believer it works, more properganda from the spin doctors but the real proof will be when some actually studies and facts come out about its use.
Hopefully the studies underway will proof it one way or the other but like all things concerning 1080, studies and real facts DOC dont seem interested in sharing unless it their spin on it and its good news for their side otherwise its sweeped under the carpet.
I bet the difference between 1080 with or without repellant is next to none...we wait and see the studies that come out to say if thats the case or not

Originally Posted by deer243

Thats all good to say, but the fact is the fallow up the Cobb were hit very hard after the first drop, from what i saw of sign when i was up there and many accounts of other hunters backed by the local DOC worker.
With animal numbers already low ,after that second drop for someone to find 3 deer carcasses says something.
By all accounts its hard enough to find anything dead in the bush after a drop, and to find 3 deer dead in a 2km radius suggests that thats just the tip of the iceberg and with low numbers suggests a good percentage was hit.
Says something about the so called repellant to me, it doesnt work very well and if you saying it works far better than without then straight 1080 must be killing a massive amount of deer, esp fallow as they tend to be grazers and the smaller body weight they dont take to it well v a red(not that they take to it well either).
Im not a believer it works, more properganda from the spin doctors but the real proof will be when some actually studies and facts come out about its use.
Hopefully the studies underway will proof it one way or the other but like all things concerning 1080, studies and real facts DOC dont seem interested in sharing unless it their spin on it and its good news for their side otherwise its sweeped under the carpet.
I bet the difference between 1080 with or without repellant is next to none...we wait and see the studies that come out to say if thats the case or not

Ok so Fallow being grass dwellers may get hit harder, as for reds in the haurangi we came across or know of up to 10 dead from repellent bait as opposed to the drop earlier where they did some with and some without. One of the older hunters said he searched the bush and found deaths many times greater in the area without repel. So does it work for red, damn straight, Fallow, unsure. Propaganda no way, instead of wasting time fighting for complete bans of 1080. Fight for the use of it with repel. That's what we did and our herd while suffering some deaths is really healthy in numbers.

Each to their own

Hamish

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by deer243

Thats all good to say, but the fact is the fallow up the Cobb were hit very hard after the first drop, from what i saw of sign when i was up there and many accounts of other hunters backed by the local DOC worker.
With animal numbers already low ,after that second drop for someone to find 3 deer carcasses says something.
By all accounts its hard enough to find anything dead in the bush after a drop, and to find 3 deer dead in a 2km radius suggests that thats just the tip of the iceberg and with low numbers suggests a good percentage was hit.
Says something about the so called repellant to me, it doesnt work very well and if you saying it works far better than without then straight 1080 must be killing a massive amount of deer, esp fallow as they tend to be grazers and the smaller body weight they dont take to it well v a red(not that they take to it well either).
Im not a believer it works, more properganda from the spin doctors but the real proof will be when some actually studies and facts come out about its use.
Hopefully the studies underway will proof it one way or the other but like all things concerning 1080, studies and real facts DOC dont seem interested in sharing unless it their spin on it and its good news for their side otherwise its sweeped under the carpet.
I bet the difference between 1080 with or without repellant is next to none...we wait and see the studies that come out to say if thats the case or not

There is very little "spin" about it actually. Its one thing that DOC & OSPRI are actually quiet about. In fact, on this topic you create more spin than "they" do.
Sure, it needs a lot more scientific research and there is no doubt that it would be great if it was more effective.

I agree with you to the extent that it probably can be improved, but lets not just reject it out of hand.

Exactly, Hamish. How many might have died if it had not been used?

Its classical inductive reasoning to start with a conclusion that we wish was true, and then to select the evidence that supports it.

I would prefer it to be used. There will always be some deaths from using poison in this way but at least there will be plenty left to breed. The average time for a deer population to recover after a 1080 operation is about 3-4 years so if the repellent saves lives recovery time should be less. Nobody likes poison but I think a population of deer with a large % carrying TB would be a lot worse.

There's a Ph.D. Student at Lincoln at the moment studying exactly that I.e. How effective (or not) it is. There's bugger all field data either way at the moment, so will be interesting to see what she actually finds. Radio collaring deer pre and post operation.

That sure will be interesting to see those results.

The deer and possums are both introduced pests anyway aren't they?

Sounds like a win win for the native bush.

Originally Posted by systolic

The deer and possums are both introduced pests anyway aren't they?

Sounds like a win win for the native bush.

And here i was, thinking you were getting a rough deal with all these window lickers giving u shit because you didnt fit their mould. But with that comment.... man you are different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk