Thread: the OFF TOPIC to Stags shot 21 (discussion of wild animal management)

Originally Posted by Stocky

I'd argue WARO is potentially detrimental to population management. They target low impact animals population wise (stags) that then conversely discourages recreational hunters to go to these areas. If they however had to shoot 10 hinds for every stag then they might be more effective. They often leave Valleys to repopulate to them hit them again to increase return on invest and tend to target the same known spots that produce stags. Ie a number of lovely faces on the coast I know were shot relegiously in summer for velvet stags. It can be used more effectively ie wapiti were the population is dropping yearly IIRK.

I agree, I should have stated that it is perceived to be free management of wild animals. It is unclear based on current evidence what impact WARO has on wild animal numbers on PCL c.f. recreational hunters, and even more unclear what those numbers actually signify in terms of ecological outcomes - i.e. the important part that the management agency has a legal mandate to consider primarily.

Subsidised WARO likely has a key place as an important management tool in a better management system for reducing populations where this achieves desired outcomes in areas where recreational hunters are unable to do so.

Recreational hunters are widely currently considered unable to manage ungulate numbers anywhere on PCL, but this assumption a) isn't particularly well supported by data although it may well be true for many areas, and b) ignores social factors - the very poor relationship and lack of trust in the management agency by hunters leading to reluctance to work towards management outcomes or share data; the lack of clearly defined and understood management targets and how to achieve them, etc.